The korean journal of orthodontics (대한치과교정학회지)

The Korean Association Of Orthodontists (대한치과교정학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Three-dimensional finite element analysis of the deformation of the human mandible: a preliminary study from the perspective of orthodontic mini-implant stability

  • Baek, Sun-Hye (Division of Orthodontics, Department of Dentistry, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine) ;
  • Cha, Hyun-Suk (Division of Prosthodontics, Department of Dentistry, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine) ;
  • Cha, Jung-Yul (Department of Orthodontics, College of Dentistry, Yonsei University) ;
  • Moon, Yoon-Shik (Division of Orthodontics, Department of Dentistry, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine) ;
  • Sung, Sang-Jin (Division of Orthodontics, Department of Dentistry, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine)
  • Received : 2012.04.21
  • Accepted : 2012.06.26
  • Published : 2012.08.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Objective: The aims of this study were to investigate mandibular deformation under clenching and to estimate its effect on the stability of orthodontic mini-implants (OMI). Methods: Three finite element models were constructed using computed tomography (CT) images of 3 adults with different mandibular plane angles (A, low; B, average; and C, high). An OMI was placed between #45 and #46 in each model. Mandibular deformation under premolar and molar clenching was simulated. Comparisons were made between peri-orthodontic mini-implant compressive strain (POMI-CSTN) under clenching and orthodontic traction forces (150 g and 200 g). Results: Three models with different mandibular plane angles demonstrated different functional deformation characteristics. The compressive strains around the OMI were distributed mesiodistally rather than occlusogingivally. In model A, the maximum POMI-CSTN under clenching was observed at the mesial aspect of #46 (1,401.75 microstrain [${\mu}E$]), and similar maximum POMI-CSTN was observed under a traction force of 150 g (1,415 ${\mu}E$). Conclusions: The maximum POMI-CSTN developed by clenching failed to exceed the normally allowed compressive cortical bone strains; however, additional orthodontic traction force to the OMI may increase POMI-CSTN to compromise OMI stability.

Keywords

References

  1. Creekmore TD, Eklund MK. The possibility of skeletal anchorage. J Clin Orthod 1983;17:266-9.
  2. Kanomi R. Mini-implant for orthodontic anchorage. J Clin Orthod 1997;31:763-7.
  3. Kuroda S, Sugawara Y, Deguchi T, Kyung HM, Takano-Yamamoto T. Clinical use of miniscrew implants as orthodontic anchorage: success rates and postoperative discomfort. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2007;131:9-15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2005.02.032
  4. Miyawaki S, Koyama I, Inoue M, Mishima K, Sugahara T, Takano-Yamamoto T. Factors associated with the stability of titanium screws placed in the posterior region for orthodontic anchorage. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2003;124:373-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-5406(03)00565-1
  5. Chen Y, Kyung HM, Zhao WT, Yu WJ. Critical factors for the success of orthodontic mini-implants: a systematic review. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2009; 135:284-91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2007.08.017
  6. Cheng SJ, Tseng IY, Lee JJ, Kok SH. A prospective study of the risk factors associated with failure of mini-implants used for orthodontic anchorage. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2004;19:100-6.
  7. Korioth TW, Hannam AG. Deformation of the human mandible during simulated tooth clenching. J Dent Res 1994;73:56-66. https://doi.org/10.1177/00220345940730010801
  8. Mo SS, Ahn HT, Lee JS, Chung YS, Moon YS, Pae EK, et al. Morphological characteristics of the upper airway and pressure drop analysis using 3D CFD in OSA patients. Korean J Orthod 2010;40:66-76. https://doi.org/10.4041/kjod.2010.40.2.66
  9. Sung SJ, Jang GW, Chun YS, Moon YS. Effective enmasse retraction design with orthodontic miniimplant anchorage: a finite element analysis. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2010;137:648-57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2008.06.036
  10. Bonnet AS, Postaire M, Lipinski P. Biomechanical study of mandible bone supporting a four-implant retained bridge: finite element analysis of the influence of bone anisotropy and foodstuff position. Med Eng Phys 2009;31:806-15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.medengphy.2009.03.004
  11. Gray H, Clemente CD. Anatomy of the human body. 30th ed. Philadelphia: Lea & Febiger; 1985.
  12. Gilroy AM, MacPherson BR, Ross LM, Schuenke M, Schulte E, Schumacher U. Atlas of Anatomy. New York: Thieme; 2008.
  13. Hylander WL. The functional significance of primate mandibular form. J Morphol 1979;160:223-40. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmor.1051600208
  14. O'Mahony AM, Williams JL, Spencer P. Anisotropic elasticity of cortical and cancellous bone in the posterior mandible increases peri-implant stress and strain under oblique loading. Clin Oral Implants Res 2001;12:648-57. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.2001.120614.x
  15. Tsunori M, Mashita M, Kasai K. Relationship between facial types and tooth and bone characteristics of the mandible obtained by CT scanning. Angle Orthod 1998;68:557-62.
  16. Sato H, Kawamura A, Yamaguchi M, Kasai K. Relationship between masticatory function and internal structure of the mandible based on computed tomography findings. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2005;128:766-73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2005.05.046
  17. Masumoto T, Hayashi I, Kawamura A, Tanaka K, Kasai K. Relationships among facial type, buccolingual molar inclination, and cortical bone thickness of the mandible. Eur J Orthod 2001;23:15-23. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/23.1.15
  18. Moon CH, Park HK, Nam JS, Im JS, Baek SH. Relationship between vertical skeletal pattern and success rate of orthodontic mini-implants. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2010;138:51-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2008.08.032
  19. Proffit WR, Fields HW, Nixon WL. Occlusal forces in normal- and long-face adults. J Dent Res 1983;62:566-70. https://doi.org/10.1177/00220345830620051201
  20. Braun S, Bantleon HP, Hnat WP, Freudenthaler JW, Marcotte MR, Johnson BE. A study of bite force, part 2: Relationship to various cephalometric measurements. Angle Orthod 1995;65:373-7.
  21. van Spronsen PH. Long-face craniofacial morphology: Cause or effect of weak masticatory musculature? Semin Orthod 2010;16:99-117. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.sodo.2010.02.001
  22. Frost HM. Suggested fundamental concepts in skeletal physiology. Calcif Tissue Int 1993;52:1-4. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00675618
  23. Frost HM. Transient-steady state phenomena in microdamage physiology: a proposed algorithm for lamellar bone. Calcif Tissue Int 1989;44:367-81. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02555964
  24. Frost HM. Wolff 's Law and bone's structural adaptations to mechanical usage: an overview for clinicians. Angle Orthod 1994;64:175-88.
  25. Kim KD, Yu WJ, Park HS, Kyung HM, Kwon OW. Optimization of orthodontic microimplant thread design. Korean J Orthod 2011;41:25-35. https://doi.org/10.4041/kjod.2011.41.1.25
  26. Wawrzinek C, Sommer T, Fischer-Brandies H. Microdamage in cortical bone due to the overtightening of orthodontic microscrews. J Orofac Orthop 2008;69:121-34. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00056-008-0742-5

Cited by

  1. Development of FEA Procedures for Mechanical Behaviors of Maxilla, Teeth and Mandible vol.17, pp.6, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1007/s12541-016-0096-7
  2. Orthodontic skeletal anchorage: Up-to-date review vol.76, pp.3, 2012, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.odw.2017.06.002
  3. Customized surgical template fabrication under biomechanical consideration by integrating CBCT image, CAD system and finite element analysis vol.37, pp.1, 2012, https://doi.org/10.4012/dmj.2016-312
  4. Three-dimensional finite element analysis of the stability of mini-implants close to the roots of adjacent teeth upon application of bite force vol.37, pp.5, 2018, https://doi.org/10.4012/dmj.2017-359
  5. Biomechanical Assessment of the Validity of Sheep as a Preclinical Model for Testing Mandibular Fracture Fixation Devices vol.9, pp.None, 2021, https://doi.org/10.3389/fbioe.2021.672176