Comparative evaluation of lower incisor intrusion using conventional method and frog staging protocol in clear aligners: A three-dimensional finite element analysis.

Q2 Dentistry
Journal of Orthodontic Science Pub Date : 2025-09-29 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.4103/jos.jos_26_25
Nataleya Felix, Srirengalakshmi Muthuswamy Pandian, Aravind Kumar Subramanian, Nikhillesh Vaiid, Anusuya Venkatachalapathy
{"title":"Comparative evaluation of lower incisor intrusion using conventional method and frog staging protocol in clear aligners: A three-dimensional finite element analysis.","authors":"Nataleya Felix, Srirengalakshmi Muthuswamy Pandian, Aravind Kumar Subramanian, Nikhillesh Vaiid, Anusuya Venkatachalapathy","doi":"10.4103/jos.jos_26_25","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Deep bite correction with aligners involves anterior intrusion and posterior extrusion. During lower incisor intrusion with clear aligners (CAs), root disengagement from the alveolar bone can cause complications. Frog staging protocol applies sequential forces, targeting lateral incisors first, then central incisors. This study compares conventional and Frog staging intrusion protocols using attachments for mandibular anterior teeth to optimize clinical practice.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>A 3D finite element (FE) model, including the clear aligner, periodontal ligament (PDL), and mandibular dentition, was established. Four groups were analyzed: Group 1 (Conventional intrusion with attachments), Group 2 (Conventional intrusion without attachments), Group 3 (Frog staging intrusion with attachments), and Group 4 (Frog staging intrusion without attachments). Rectangular molar attachments (4.0 × 2.0 × 0.75 mm) and vertical canine attachments (3.5 × 1.8 × 0.75 mm) provided anchorage. Incisor attachments (3.0 × 1.5 × 0.75 mm) facilitated precise force application. Stress distribution was evaluated using von Mises stress (overall stress), maximum principal stress (tensile), and minimum principal stress (compressive).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Frog staging resulted in balanced stress distribution and reduced adverse effects compared to conventional intrusion. Attachments minimized stress and displacement, enhancing intrusion mechanics. Frog staging better controlled root displacement and stress concentration at the root apex.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Frog staging intrusion with attachments is biomechanically superior for lower incisor intrusion, reducing complications and providing a safer approach for deep bite correction with CAs.</p>","PeriodicalId":16604,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Orthodontic Science","volume":"14 ","pages":"39"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12558400/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Orthodontic Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/jos.jos_26_25","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Dentistry","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: Deep bite correction with aligners involves anterior intrusion and posterior extrusion. During lower incisor intrusion with clear aligners (CAs), root disengagement from the alveolar bone can cause complications. Frog staging protocol applies sequential forces, targeting lateral incisors first, then central incisors. This study compares conventional and Frog staging intrusion protocols using attachments for mandibular anterior teeth to optimize clinical practice.

Materials and methods: A 3D finite element (FE) model, including the clear aligner, periodontal ligament (PDL), and mandibular dentition, was established. Four groups were analyzed: Group 1 (Conventional intrusion with attachments), Group 2 (Conventional intrusion without attachments), Group 3 (Frog staging intrusion with attachments), and Group 4 (Frog staging intrusion without attachments). Rectangular molar attachments (4.0 × 2.0 × 0.75 mm) and vertical canine attachments (3.5 × 1.8 × 0.75 mm) provided anchorage. Incisor attachments (3.0 × 1.5 × 0.75 mm) facilitated precise force application. Stress distribution was evaluated using von Mises stress (overall stress), maximum principal stress (tensile), and minimum principal stress (compressive).

Results: Frog staging resulted in balanced stress distribution and reduced adverse effects compared to conventional intrusion. Attachments minimized stress and displacement, enhancing intrusion mechanics. Frog staging better controlled root displacement and stress concentration at the root apex.

Conclusions: Frog staging intrusion with attachments is biomechanically superior for lower incisor intrusion, reducing complications and providing a safer approach for deep bite correction with CAs.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

使用常规方法和青蛙分期方案对下门牙侵入的比较评估:三维有限元分析。
目的:用矫正器进行深咬合矫正包括前牙压入和后牙挤压。在使用透明矫正器(ca)的下门牙侵入时,牙根脱离牙槽骨会引起并发症。蛙式分期方案使用顺序力,首先针对侧门牙,然后是中门牙。本研究比较了传统的和青蛙分期侵入方案使用附着体下颌前牙优化临床实践。材料与方法:建立三维有限元(FE)模型,包括清牙对准器、牙周韧带(PDL)和下颌牙列。分析四组:第1组(带附件的常规入侵)、第2组(不带附件的常规入侵)、第3组(带附件的青蛙分期入侵)和第4组(不带附件的青蛙分期入侵)。矩形磨牙附着体(4.0 × 2.0 × 0.75 mm)和垂直犬齿附着体(3.5 × 1.8 × 0.75 mm)提供固支。切牙附件(3.0 × 1.5 × 0.75 mm)便于精确施力。应力分布采用von Mises应力(总应力)、最大主应力(拉应力)和最小主应力(压应力)进行评估。结果:与常规侵入相比,蛙式侵入使应力分布平衡,减少了不良反应。附件减小了应力和位移,增强了侵入力学。青蛙分期较好地控制了根的位移和根尖的应力集中。结论:蛙式附着体植入对下切牙植入具有生物力学上的优势,可减少并发症,为采用ca进行深咬合矫正提供了更安全的方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Orthodontic Science
Journal of Orthodontic Science Dentistry-Orthodontics
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
46
审稿时长
19 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书