American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics : official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics · 2023
Different biomechanical effects of clear aligners in closing maxillary and mandibular extraction spaces: Finite element analysis.
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.
Liu Jun-Qi, Zhu Guan-Yin, Wang Yi-Gan, Zhang Bo, Yao Ke, Zhao Zhi-He
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: Compared with fixed treatments, clear aligners (CAs) have the advantages of comfort, esthetics, and hygiene, and are popular among patients and orthodontists. However, CAs exhibit control deficiencies in extraction patients because of insufficient root control and retention effects. These deficiencies can magnify biomechanical differences in bimaxillary dentition, further causing different orthodontic requirements between maxillary and mandibular dentition. This study aimed to elaborate on the biomechanical characteristics of bimaxillary dentition in extraction space closure and provided feasible biomechanical compensation strategies for use in clinical practice.
METHODS: We constructed a 3-dimensional (3D) bimaxillary model based on patient data. Several 3D modeling-related software was used to generate a standard first premolar extraction model, CAs, and attachments. Subsequently, finite element analysis was performed to demonstrate the biomechanical effects.
RESULTS: The maxillary and mandibular dentition showed a roller coaster effect during space closure. Compared with the maxillary dentition, the mandibular posterior teeth exhibited stronger relative anchorage causing greater anterior teeth retraction. The tipping and vertical movements of the anterior teeth were related to tooth length. The longer the anterior tooth, the less tipping and greater vertical displacement occurred. Generally, when having the same retraction distance, the mandibular dentition exhibited greater retroclination and fewer extrusions. Both mechanical and retention compensations should be considered to prevent these unwanted tipping movements. Adding specific attachments to bimaxillary dentitions compensated for the retention and root control deficiencies of CAs.
CONCLUSIONS: When applying CAs to extraction patients, different biomechanical effects can present in the bimaxillary dentition because of specific dentition morphologies. To effectively treat these patients, mechanical compensation through overcorrection of the target position should be designed on the basis of bimaxillary control deficiencies, and retention compensation by adding specific attachments should also be considered according to the overcorrections.
METHODS: We constructed a 3-dimensional (3D) bimaxillary model based on patient data. Several 3D modeling-related software was used to generate a standard first premolar extraction model, CAs, and attachments. Subsequently, finite element analysis was performed to demonstrate the biomechanical effects.
RESULTS: The maxillary and mandibular dentition showed a roller coaster effect during space closure. Compared with the maxillary dentition, the mandibular posterior teeth exhibited stronger relative anchorage causing greater anterior teeth retraction. The tipping and vertical movements of the anterior teeth were related to tooth length. The longer the anterior tooth, the less tipping and greater vertical displacement occurred. Generally, when having the same retraction distance, the mandibular dentition exhibited greater retroclination and fewer extrusions. Both mechanical and retention compensations should be considered to prevent these unwanted tipping movements. Adding specific attachments to bimaxillary dentitions compensated for the retention and root control deficiencies of CAs.
CONCLUSIONS: When applying CAs to extraction patients, different biomechanical effects can present in the bimaxillary dentition because of specific dentition morphologies. To effectively treat these patients, mechanical compensation through overcorrection of the target position should be designed on the basis of bimaxillary control deficiencies, and retention compensation by adding specific attachments should also be considered according to the overcorrections.