Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2014 Dec;8(12):ZC77-80.
doi: 10.7860/JCDR/2014/10099.5353. Epub 2014 Dec 5.

Torque Loss in En-Masse Retraction of Maxillary Anterior Teeth Using Miniimplants with Force Vectors at Different Levels: 3D FEM Study

Abhishek Parashar  1 , Kaladhar Reddy Aileni  2 , Madhukar Reddy Rachala  3 , Nagam Reddy Shashidhar  4 , Vankre Mallikarjun  5 , Nupur Parik  6
Affiliations

Torque Loss in En-Masse Retraction of Maxillary Anterior Teeth Using Miniimplants with Force Vectors at Different Levels: 3D FEM Study

Abhishek Parashar et al. J Clin Diagn Res. 2014 Dec.

Abstract

Objective: This FEM study was conducted to quantify the amount of torque loss in maxillary anterior teeth by applying force vectors from different levels to the anterior retraction hook at various heights and comparing with that of molar anchorage system.

Materials and methods: Five 3D FEM models were constructed with force vectors at different levels: HOT-High Orthodontic Traction (13.5mm from archwire) to ARH1- Anterior Retraction Hook (5mm), HOT to ARH2 (8mm), LOT- Low Orthodontic Traction (8 mm) to ARH1, LOT to ARH2 and from conventional molar hook to ARH1. Mini-implants were placed buccally between the roots of second premolar and first molar. Torque loss was calculated by measuring the displacement of the teeth at crown tip and root apex in two planes i.e. sagittal and vertical using Y and Z axis respectively in all the five models. The results were statistically analyzed by using Kruskal Wallis ANOVA and Mann-Whitney U-test.

Results: HOT to ARH1 showed that the anterior teeth moved bodily (p =0.5127), followed by molar hook - ARH1(p=0.0495*) which showed mild uncontrolled tipping. Whereas the HOT- ARH2, LOT - ARH1,and LOT - ARH2 models exhibited uncontrolled tipping with maximum torque loss in LOT - ARH1 (p=0.0001*).

Conclusion: It can be concluded that bodily movement with very minimal torque loss was observed in HOT-ARH1 model whereas the maximum torque loss was recorded in LOT-ARH2 model. Conventional molar anchorage group showed uncontrolled tipping with some amount of extrusion and anchor loss of posteriors.

Keywords: Anterior retraction hook; En-masse retraction; Finite element method; Mini-implants; Torque loss.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

[Table/Fig-1]:
[Table/Fig-1]:
FEM model showing different force applications
[Table/Fig-2]:
[Table/Fig-2]:
Torque measurement of maxillary anterior teeth in FEM model
[Table/Fig-3]:
[Table/Fig-3]:
Comparison of crown tip and root tip groups with respect to displacement in Y axis in five groups by Mann-Whitney U test
[Table/Fig-4]:
[Table/Fig-4]:
Comparison of crown tip and root tip groups with respect to displacement in Z axis in five groups by Mann-Whitney U test
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Isaacson RJ, Lindauer SJ, Rubenstein LK. Moments with the edge wise appliance: Incisor torque control. Am J OrthodDentofacialOrthop. 1993;103:428–38. - PubMed
    1. Huang LH, Shotwell JL, Wang HL. Dental implants for orthodontic anchorage. Am J OrthodDentofacialOrthop. 2005;127:713–22. - PubMed
    1. Creekmore TD, Eklund MK. The possibility of skeletal anchorage. J ClinOrthod. 1983;17:266–69. - PubMed
    1. Kanomi R. Mini implants in orthodontic anchorage. J ClinOrthod. 1997;31:763–67. - PubMed
    1. Park HS, Kwon TG. Sliding mechanics with mini screw anchorage. Angle Orthod. 2004;74:703–10. - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources