Marta Jorge1, Mário Vaz2, Jorge Lopes3, Josep-Maria Ustrell-Torrent4, Behzad Farahani5, Maria-João Ponces6. 1. PhD Student of Faculty of Dental Medicine of University of Porto. 2. Associate Professor with Tenure, Faculty of Engineering. 3. Full Professor of Faculty of Dental Medicine of University of Porto. 4. Full Professor of Vice Dean of Dentistry of Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences. University of Barcelona. Oral Health and Masticatory System Group (Bellvitge Biomedical Research Institute) IDIBELL. 5. Post Doctoral Researcher in INEGI - Instituto de Ciência e Inovação em Engenharia Mecânica e Engenharia Industrial. 6. Auxiliary Professor of Faculty of Dental Medicine of University of Porto.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In orthodontic treatment, the combination of an activator with a headgear is commonly used in treatment of the hyperdivergent Class II malocclusion. However, the distribution of stresses transmitted to the maxilla by these appliances has been little studied. This study aimed to compare the biomechanical effects of stresses transmitted to the maxilla and teeth by a Teuscher activator (TA) for different lines of action of extraoral force, using finite element analysis. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A tridimensional finite element model of the maxilla and teeth was created based on the true geometry of a human skull. The (TA) and the face bow were designed in 3D computer-aided design and fixed in the maxilla model. To study the effects of mechanical stress transmitted to the maxilla in the treatment of hyperdivergent Class II malocclusion with (TA) combined with extraoral forces, five different finite element models were used, considering the centers of resistance of the maxilla and dentition. RESULTS: The results showed that stresses increased progressively when the force line of action moved in posteroanterior direction. Von Mises equivalent stress was lower in Model 1 (0°) than in Model 5 (60°). In Models 1 (0°) and 2 (15°), molars suffered greater distal displacement and incisors showed extrusion. In Model 3 (30°), the force line of action promoted a distal displacement of molars and incisors. In Models 4 (45°) and 5 (60°), the whole maxillary anterior sector showed counterclockwise displacement. CONCLUSIONS: Different force lines of action influence the intensity and distribution of orthodontic and orthopedic forces in the maxilla. The extraoral force's line of action used in Model 3 (30°) is the most compatible with the objectives of the hyperdivergent Class II malocclusion treatment in growing patients. Key words:Class II, Headgear, Early treatment, FEA. Copyright:
BACKGROUND: In orthodontic treatment, the combination of an activator with a headgear is commonly used in treatment of the hyperdivergent Class II malocclusion. However, the distribution of stresses transmitted to the maxilla by these appliances has been little studied. This study aimed to compare the biomechanical effects of stresses transmitted to the maxilla and teeth by a Teuscher activator (TA) for different lines of action of extraoral force, using finite element analysis. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A tridimensional finite element model of the maxilla and teeth was created based on the true geometry of a human skull. The (TA) and the face bow were designed in 3D computer-aided design and fixed in the maxilla model. To study the effects of mechanical stress transmitted to the maxilla in the treatment of hyperdivergent Class II malocclusion with (TA) combined with extraoral forces, five different finite element models were used, considering the centers of resistance of the maxilla and dentition. RESULTS: The results showed that stresses increased progressively when the force line of action moved in posteroanterior direction. Von Mises equivalent stress was lower in Model 1 (0°) than in Model 5 (60°). In Models 1 (0°) and 2 (15°), molars suffered greater distal displacement and incisors showed extrusion. In Model 3 (30°), the force line of action promoted a distal displacement of molars and incisors. In Models 4 (45°) and 5 (60°), the whole maxillary anterior sector showed counterclockwise displacement. CONCLUSIONS: Different force lines of action influence the intensity and distribution of orthodontic and orthopedic forces in the maxilla. The extraoral force's line of action used in Model 3 (30°) is the most compatible with the objectives of the hyperdivergent Class II malocclusion treatment in growing patients. Key words:Class II, Headgear, Early treatment, FEA. Copyright:
Authors: Renato Parsekian Martins; Joel Claudio da Rosa Martins; Lidia Parsekian Martins; Peter H Buschang Journal: Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop Date: 2008-12 Impact factor: 2.650
Authors: Erin Dobbins Zervas; Maria Therese S Galang-Boquiren; Ales Obrez; Maria Grace Costa Viana; Nelson Oppermann; Flavio Sanchez; Enrique Garcia Romero; Budi Kusnoto Journal: Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop Date: 2016-11 Impact factor: 2.650