OBJECTIVES: This study aims to compare the stress distribution and displacement that resulted from the use of a Gerber space regainer and sagittal distalizer using three-dimensional finite element analysis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Three-dimensional simulated models of the appliances were developed using a software. The forces applied by the two appliances were 3N (tipping) and 15N (bodily), respectively. Displacement and von Mises stress on the compact and cancellous bone, periodontal ligament (PDL), crowns of the mandibular first, second permanent molars, and deciduous canines were calculated. Stress distribution and displacement values were measured via linear static analysis. RESULTS: Gerber space regainer showed greater displacement than that produced by the sagittal distalizer at the first permanent molar. However, such displacement was less at the other tested points when compared with that delivered by sagittal distalizer. The stresses created by Gerber appliance were higher in the crown and PDL of the deciduous canine than the crown of the first permanent molar crown. CONCLUSIONS: Gerber appliance generates more distal force and less stress concentration on the crown of the mandibular first permanent molar than that created by the sagittal distalizer. On the other hand, stress concentrations produced by Gerber space regainer are found to be more on the crown and PDL of the deciduous canine. Therefore, it can be concluded that the use of Gerber appliance needs more anchorage.
OBJECTIVES: This study aims to compare the stress distribution and displacement that resulted from the use of a Gerber space regainer and sagittal distalizer using three-dimensional finite element analysis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Three-dimensional simulated models of the appliances were developed using a software. The forces applied by the two appliances were 3N (tipping) and 15N (bodily), respectively. Displacement and von Mises stress on the compact and cancellous bone, periodontal ligament (PDL), crowns of the mandibular first, second permanent molars, and deciduous canines were calculated. Stress distribution and displacement values were measured via linear static analysis. RESULTS: Gerber space regainer showed greater displacement than that produced by the sagittal distalizer at the first permanent molar. However, such displacement was less at the other tested points when compared with that delivered by sagittal distalizer. The stresses created by Gerber appliance were higher in the crown and PDL of the deciduous canine than the crown of the first permanent molar crown. CONCLUSIONS: Gerber appliance generates more distal force and less stress concentration on the crown of the mandibular first permanent molar than that created by the sagittal distalizer. On the other hand, stress concentrations produced by Gerber space regainer are found to be more on the crown and PDL of the deciduous canine. Therefore, it can be concluded that the use of Gerber appliance needs more anchorage.