Spyridon N Papageorgiou1, Ludger Keilig2, Istabrak Hasan2, Andreas Jäger3, Christoph Bourauel4. 1. Departments of Orthodontics, Oral Technology, and. 2. Oral Technology, and Prosthodontics, Preclinical Education and Dental Materials Science, School of Dentistry, University of Bonn, Germany. 3. Departments of Orthodontics. 4. Oral Technology, and bourauel@uni-bonn.de.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Biomechanical analysis of orthodontic tooth movement is complex, as many different tissues and appliance components are involved. The aim of this finite element study was to assess the relative effect of material alteration of the various components of the orthodontic appliance on the biomechanical behaviour of tooth movement. METHODS: A three-dimensional finite element solid model was constructed. The model consisted of a canine, a first, and a second premolar, including the surrounding tooth-supporting structures and fixed appliances. The materials of the orthodontic appliances were alternated between: (1) composite resin or resin-modified glass ionomer cement for the adhesive, (2) steel, titanium, ceramic, or plastic for the bracket, and (3) β-titanium or steel for the wire. After vertical activation of the first premolar by 0.5mm in occlusal direction, stress and strain calculations were performed at the periodontal ligament and the orthodontic appliance. RESULTS: The finite element analysis indicated that strains developed at the periodontal ligament were mainly influenced by the orthodontic wire (up to +63 per cent), followed by the bracket (up to +44 per cent) and the adhesive (up to +4 per cent). As far as developed stresses at the orthodontic appliance are concerned, wire material had the greatest influence (up to +155 per cent), followed by bracket material (up to +148 per cent) and adhesive material (up to +8 per cent). LIMITATIONS: The results of this in silico study need to be validated by in vivo studies before they can be extrapolated to clinical practice. CONCLUSION: According to the results of this finite element study, all components of the orthodontic fixed appliance, including wire, bracket, and adhesive, seem to influence, to some extent, the biomechanics of tooth movement.
INTRODUCTION: Biomechanical analysis of orthodontic tooth movement is complex, as many different tissues and appliance components are involved. The aim of this finite element study was to assess the relative effect of material alteration of the various components of the orthodontic appliance on the biomechanical behaviour of tooth movement. METHODS: A three-dimensional finite element solid model was constructed. The model consisted of a canine, a first, and a second premolar, including the surrounding tooth-supporting structures and fixed appliances. The materials of the orthodontic appliances were alternated between: (1) composite resin or resin-modified glass ionomer cement for the adhesive, (2) steel, titanium, ceramic, or plastic for the bracket, and (3) β-titanium or steel for the wire. After vertical activation of the first premolar by 0.5mm in occlusal direction, stress and strain calculations were performed at the periodontal ligament and the orthodontic appliance. RESULTS: The finite element analysis indicated that strains developed at the periodontal ligament were mainly influenced by the orthodontic wire (up to +63 per cent), followed by the bracket (up to +44 per cent) and the adhesive (up to +4 per cent). As far as developed stresses at the orthodontic appliance are concerned, wire material had the greatest influence (up to +155 per cent), followed by bracket material (up to +148 per cent) and adhesive material (up to +8 per cent). LIMITATIONS: The results of this in silico study need to be validated by in vivo studies before they can be extrapolated to clinical practice. CONCLUSION: According to the results of this finite element study, all components of the orthodontic fixed appliance, including wire, bracket, and adhesive, seem to influence, to some extent, the biomechanics of tooth movement.
Authors: Monica Namburi; Sleevaraju Nagothu; Chetan S Kumar; N Chakrapani; C H Hanumantharao; Supradeep K Kumar Journal: Prog Orthod Date: 2017-01-09 Impact factor: 2.750