American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics : official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics · 2024
A finite element analysis of the effects of semipontic design on tooth movement during mesialization of the mandibular second molar with clear aligners.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Koru Akan Burcu Ece, Hancıoğlu Kircelli Beyza, Paşaoğlu Bozkurt Aylin, Gögen Hakan
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: Loss of the mandibular first molar is common in orthodontic patients. One treatment option is the mesialization of the second and third molars. This study aimed to investigate the displacement and type of movement in the second molar during mandibular second molar mesialization with clear aligner treatment using finite element analysis in configurations with or without pontic, semipontic, and anatomic pontic for the edentulous space.
METHODS: Mesialization of the mandibular second molar with clear aligner treatment was simulated using the AlGOR Fempro program (ALGOR, Inc, Pa) with 3 different configurations.
RESULTS: In the transverse direction, the highest rotation occurred in the anatomic pontic model, whereas the lowest rotation was in the semipontic model. In the sagittal axis, although tooth movement was realized by tipping in all scenarios, the semipontic model showed the closest movement to translation because of a higher rate of crown-root movement. In the vertical axis, although extrusion occurred in all configurations, the semipontic model showed the least extrusion forces, whereas the anatomic pontic model showed the most.
CONCLUSIONS: Mesiobuccal rotation, mesial tipping, and extrusion were observed in all models. However, the semipontic design had the closest movement to translational. Further randomized, controlled clinical trials are needed to evaluate the effects of different pontic designs on tooth movements.
METHODS: Mesialization of the mandibular second molar with clear aligner treatment was simulated using the AlGOR Fempro program (ALGOR, Inc, Pa) with 3 different configurations.
RESULTS: In the transverse direction, the highest rotation occurred in the anatomic pontic model, whereas the lowest rotation was in the semipontic model. In the sagittal axis, although tooth movement was realized by tipping in all scenarios, the semipontic model showed the closest movement to translation because of a higher rate of crown-root movement. In the vertical axis, although extrusion occurred in all configurations, the semipontic model showed the least extrusion forces, whereas the anatomic pontic model showed the most.
CONCLUSIONS: Mesiobuccal rotation, mesial tipping, and extrusion were observed in all models. However, the semipontic design had the closest movement to translational. Further randomized, controlled clinical trials are needed to evaluate the effects of different pontic designs on tooth movements.