Jun Nihara1, Krystyna Gielo-Perczak2, Lucas Cardinal3, Isao Saito4, Ravindra Nanda5, Flavio Uribe3. 1. *Division of Orthodontics, Department of Craniofacial Sciences, University of Connecticut Health Center, Farmington, USA, **Division of Orthodontics, Department of Oral Biological Sciences, Niigata University, Japan, nihara@dent.niigata-u.ac.jp. 2. ***Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Connecticut, School of Engineering, Storrs, USA. 3. *Division of Orthodontics, Department of Craniofacial Sciences, University of Connecticut Health Center, Farmington, USA. 4. **Division of Orthodontics, Department of Oral Biological Sciences, Niigata University, Japan. 5. ****Department of Craniofacial Sciences, Alumni Endowed Chair, School of Dental Medicine, University of Connecticut, Farmington, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/ OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to determine the most desirable force system to achieve molar protraction from an interdental miniscrew minimizing side-effects. Several iterations of force delivery were simulated through variations in the height of a miniscrew, length of a molar extension arm, and incorporation of a lingual force. MATERIALS/ METHODS: A three-dimensional mesh model of the right posterior segment of the mandible was developed from cone beam computed tomography data from a patient missing a first molar. Protraction appliances were constructed using computer-aided design software and integrated with finite element software. After mesh generation, a total of 80 loading conditions were simulated by altering the extension arm length (2-10mm), miniscrew height (0-8mm), and magnitude of protraction force from the lingual side (0-1.5 N). A constant labial force of 1 N was used in all models. RESULTS: As the length of the extension arm increased, mesial tipping decreased, rotation decreased, and buccolingual inclination remained the same without lingual traction force. Lingual traction reduced rotation but increased tipping. Similar trends were observed in all situations despite of the height of the miniscrew. CONCLUSIONS: The height of the miniscrew is not as critical in affecting tooth movement during mandibular second molar protraction as the length of the extension arm. The most ideal force system in the model appeared to be the longest extension arm (10mm) with the addition of a lingual force of half or equal magnitude of the labial force.
BACKGROUND/ OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to determine the most desirable force system to achieve molar protraction from an interdental miniscrew minimizing side-effects. Several iterations of force delivery were simulated through variations in the height of a miniscrew, length of a molar extension arm, and incorporation of a lingual force. MATERIALS/ METHODS: A three-dimensional mesh model of the right posterior segment of the mandible was developed from cone beam computed tomography data from a patient missing a first molar. Protraction appliances were constructed using computer-aided design software and integrated with finite element software. After mesh generation, a total of 80 loading conditions were simulated by altering the extension arm length (2-10mm), miniscrew height (0-8mm), and magnitude of protraction force from the lingual side (0-1.5 N). A constant labial force of 1 N was used in all models. RESULTS: As the length of the extension arm increased, mesial tipping decreased, rotation decreased, and buccolingual inclination remained the same without lingual traction force. Lingual traction reduced rotation but increased tipping. Similar trends were observed in all situations despite of the height of the miniscrew. CONCLUSIONS: The height of the miniscrew is not as critical in affecting tooth movement during mandibular second molar protraction as the length of the extension arm. The most ideal force system in the model appeared to be the longest extension arm (10mm) with the addition of a lingual force of half or equal magnitude of the labial force.