Mauro Cozzani1, Donia Sadri2, Ludovica Nucci3, Parsa Jamilian4, Amir Parham Pirhadirad5, Abdolreza Jamilian6. 1. Istituto Giuseppe Cozzani, La Spezia, Italy. 2. Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Pathology, Faculty of Dentistry, Tehran Medical Sciences, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran. Donia1351@yahoo.com. 3. Dental School, Multidisciplinary Department of Medical-Surgical and Dental Specialties, University of Campania Luigi Vanvitelli, Naples, Italy. 4. International Baccalaureate Program, Danube International School, Vienna, Austria. 5. Department of Bio Medical Engineering, Faculty of Bio Medical Engineering, Science and Research Branch, Cranio Maxillofacial Research Center, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran. 6. Department of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Cranio Maxillofacial Research Center, Tehran Medical Sciences, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The aims of this study were to compare the effect of 4 bracket systems including Alexander, Roth, MBT, and Gianelly on upper anterior retraction and to quantify the amount of torque loss ratio in sliding mechanics by help of a 3-dimensional (3D) finite element method. METHOD AND MATERIALS: 3D FEM models were constructed in order to simulate anterior incisor retraction in first premolar extraction case. Displacement, stress, and strain on the incisal edge and apex of maxillary central incisor were calculated when 1-, 2-, and 3-N retraction forces were applied. Torque loss ratio was calculated by measuring the displacement of the teeth at crown tip and root apex in all 4 bracket systems on upper central incisor. RESULTS: Uncontrolled lingual crown tipping of the incisor was observed in all bracket systems. The crown moved lingually by 9.5 μm and the root labially by 4.5 μm in MBT system with 3-N retraction force. The amount of crown movement was 8 μm and the root displacement was 4 μm in Gianelly system with the same retraction force. Torque loss ratio was 1.46 in Alexander and Gianelly with 3-N retraction force. However, the amount of torque loss ratio was 1.47 in MBT and Roth with the same retraction force. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Uncontrolled tipping was the least in Gianelly and was the highest in MBT. The amount of torque loss ratio was the lowest in Gianelly and Alexander systems and the amount of torque loss ratio was the highest in MBT system.
OBJECTIVES: The aims of this study were to compare the effect of 4 bracket systems including Alexander, Roth, MBT, and Gianelly on upper anterior retraction and to quantify the amount of torque loss ratio in sliding mechanics by help of a 3-dimensional (3D) finite element method. METHOD AND MATERIALS: 3D FEM models were constructed in order to simulate anterior incisor retraction in first premolar extraction case. Displacement, stress, and strain on the incisal edge and apex of maxillary central incisor were calculated when 1-, 2-, and 3-N retraction forces were applied. Torque loss ratio was calculated by measuring the displacement of the teeth at crown tip and root apex in all 4 bracket systems on upper central incisor. RESULTS: Uncontrolled lingual crown tipping of the incisor was observed in all bracket systems. The crown moved lingually by 9.5 μm and the root labially by 4.5 μm in MBT system with 3-N retraction force. The amount of crown movement was 8 μm and the root displacement was 4 μm in Gianelly system with the same retraction force. Torque loss ratio was 1.46 in Alexander and Gianelly with 3-N retraction force. However, the amount of torque loss ratio was 1.47 in MBT and Roth with the same retraction force. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Uncontrolled tipping was the least in Gianelly and was the highest in MBT. The amount of torque loss ratio was the lowest in Gianelly and Alexander systems and the amount of torque loss ratio was the highest in MBT system.
Authors: Nunzio Cirulli; Alessio Danilo Inchingolo; Assunta Patano; Sabino Ceci; Grazia Marinelli; Giuseppina Malcangi; Giovanni Coloccia; Valentina Montenegro; Chiara Di Pede; Anna Maria Ciocia; Giuseppe Barile; Antonio Mancini; Giulia Palmieri; Daniela Azzollini; Biagio Rapone; Ludovica Nucci; Ioana Roxana Bordea; Antonio Scarano; Felice Lorusso; Gianluca Martino Tartaglia; Cinzia Maspero; Manuel Nuzzolese; Filippo Cardarelli; Daniela Di Venere; Angelo Michele Inchingolo; Gianna Dipalma; Francesco Inchingolo Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-06-17 Impact factor: 4.614
Authors: Naseer Ahmed; Maria Shakoor Abbasi; Filza Zuberi; Warisha Qamar; Mohamad Syahrizal Bin Halim; Afsheen Maqsood; Mohammad Khursheed Alam Journal: Biomed Res Int Date: 2021-06-22 Impact factor: 3.411