Three-dimensional finite element analysis on the effects of maxillary protraction with an individual titanium plate at multiple directions and locations
- PMID: 38533598
- PMCID: PMC10973726
- DOI: 10.4041/kjod23.217
Three-dimensional finite element analysis on the effects of maxillary protraction with an individual titanium plate at multiple directions and locations
Abstract
Objective: : A three-dimensional-printed individual titanium plate was applied for maxillary protraction to eliminate side effects and obtain the maximum skeletal effect. This study aimed to explore the stress distribution characteristics of sutures during maxillary protraction using individual titanium plates in various directions and locations.
Methods: : A protraction force of 500 g per side was applied at forward and downward angles between 0° and 60° with respect to the Frankfort horizontal plane, after which the titanium plate was moved 2 and 4 mm upward and downward, respectively. Changes in sutures with multiple protraction directions and various miniplate heights were quantified to analyze their impact on the maxillofacial bone.
Results: : Protraction angle of 0-30° with respect to the Frankfort horizontal plane exhibited a tendency for counterclockwise rotation in the maxilla. At a 40° protraction angle, translational motion was observed in the maxilla, whereas protraction angles of 50-60° tended to induce clockwise rotation in the maxilla. Enhanced protraction efficiency at the lower edge of the pyriform aperture was associated with increased height of individual titanium plates.
Conclusions: : Various protraction directions are suitable for patients with different types of vertical bone surfaces. Furthermore, when the titanium plate was positioned lower, the protraction force exhibited an increase.
Keywords: Face mask; Finite element analysis; Miniplate; Three-dimensional printing.
Conflict of interest statement
No potential conflict of interest relevant to this article was reported.
Figures







References
-
- Dietrich UC. Morphological variability of skeletal Class 3 relationships as revealed by cephalometric analysis. Rep Congr Eur Orthod Soc. 1970;46:131–43. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/5287485/ - PubMed
-
- Sar C, Arman-Özçırpıcı A, Uçkan S, Yazıcı AC. Comparative evaluation of maxillary protraction with or without skeletal anchorage. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2011;139:636–49. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2009.06.039. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2009.06.039. - DOI - PubMed
-
- Cevidanes L, Baccetti T, Franchi L, McNamara JA, Jr, De Clerck H. Comparison of two protocols for maxillary protraction: bone anchors versus face mask with rapid maxillary expansion. Angle Orthod. 2010;80:799–806. doi: 10.2319/111709-651.1. https://doi.org/10.2319/111709-651.1. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
-
- Zhou YH, Ding P, Lin Y, Qiu L. [Preliminary study on miniplate implant anchorage for maxillary protraction]. Chin J Orthod. 2007;14:102–5. Chinese. https://caod.oriprobe.com/articles/52754/Preliminary_study_on_miniplate_....
-
- Liang S, Xie X, Wang F, Chang Q, Wang H, Bai Y. Maxillary protraction using customized mini-plates for anchorage in an adolescent girl with skeletal Class III malocclusion. Korean J Orthod. 2020;50:346–55. doi: 10.4041/kjod.2020.50.5.346. https://doi.org/10.4041/kjod.2020.50.5.346. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources