Comparison of Tooth- and Bone-Borne Appliances on the Stress Distributions and Displacement Patterns in the Facial Skeleton in Surgically Assisted Rapid Maxillary Expansion-A Finite Element Analysis (FEA) Study.

SARME finite element analysis maxillary constriction maxillary expansion orthognathic surgery transpalatal distraction

Journal

Materials (Basel, Switzerland)
ISSN: 1996-1944
Titre abrégé: Materials (Basel)
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101555929

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
01 Mar 2021
Historique:
received: 10 01 2021
revised: 17 02 2021
accepted: 22 02 2021
entrez: 3 4 2021
pubmed: 4 4 2021
medline: 4 4 2021
Statut: epublish

Résumé

The aim of this study was to compare the reduced stresses according to Huber's hypothesis and the displacement pattern in the region of the facial skeleton using a tooth- or bone-borne appliance in surgically assisted rapid maxillary expansion (SARME). In the current literature, the lack of updated reports about biomechanical effects in bone-borne appliances used in SARME is noticeable. Finite element analysis (FEA) was used for this study. Six facial skeleton models were created, five with various variants of osteotomy and one without osteotomy. Two different appliances for maxillary expansion were used for each model. The three-dimensional (3D) model of the facial skeleton was created on the basis of spiral computed tomography (CT) scans of a 32-year-old patient with maxillary constriction. The finite element model was built using ANSYS 15.0 software, in which the computations were carried out. Stress distributions and displacement values along the 3D axes were found for each osteotomy variant with the expansion of the tooth- and the bone-borne devices at a level of 0.5 mm. The investigation showed that in the case of a full osteotomy of the maxilla, as described by Bell and Epker in 1976, the method of fixing the appliance for maxillary expansion had no impact on the distribution of the reduced stresses according to Huber's hypothesis in the facial skeleton. In the case of the bone-borne appliance, the load on the teeth, which may lead to periodontal and orthodontic complications, was eliminated. In the case of a full osteotomy of the maxilla, displacements in the buccolingual direction for all the variables of the bone-borne appliance were slightly bigger than for the tooth-borne appliance.

Identifiants

pubmed: 33804454
pii: ma14051152
doi: 10.3390/ma14051152
pmc: PMC7957660
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Références

Angle Orthod. 1980 Jul;50(3):189-217
pubmed: 6996533
Angle Orthod. 2004 Feb;74(1):71-8
pubmed: 15038493
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1990 Mar;97(3):194-9
pubmed: 2178393
Angle Orthod. 2006 Jul;76(4):543-50
pubmed: 16808557
Angle Orthod. 2003 Feb;73(1):12-20
pubmed: 12607850
Chin J Traumatol. 2017 Feb;20(1):9-13
pubmed: 28202368
Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2013 Mar;42(3):321-5
pubmed: 23092854
Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2005 Oct;34(7):709-14
pubmed: 15961279
J Dent Res. 1971 Nov-Dec;50(6):1492-4
pubmed: 5289054
J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2016 Feb;74(2):338-48
pubmed: 26187360
Am J Orthod. 1975 Jan;67(1):44-56
pubmed: 803165
Am J Orthod. 1981 Jun;79(6):630-52
pubmed: 7015868
Biomed Res Int. 2020 Jan 23;2020:5814103
pubmed: 32090098
J Orofac Orthop. 2003 Nov;64(6):443-9
pubmed: 14628136
Dent Mater. 2006 Jan;22(1):3-12
pubmed: 16061281
Angle Orthod. 2006 Sep;76(5):759-67
pubmed: 17029507
Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2009 Sep;13(3):123-37
pubmed: 19590910
Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1999 Aug;37(4):268-72
pubmed: 10475647
J Maxillofac Oral Surg. 2012 Jun;11(2):206-11
pubmed: 23730071
Am J Orthod. 1976 Aug;70(2):123-37
pubmed: 821349
Am J Orthod. 1976 Nov;70(5):517-28
pubmed: 790971
J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1993 May;51(5):480-94
pubmed: 8478755
J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2008 Dec;66(12):2503-14
pubmed: 19022131
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1987 Jan;91(1):3-14
pubmed: 3541577
Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2021 Feb;59(2):e29-e47
pubmed: 33431313
Dental Press J Orthod. 2017 Feb;22(1):110-125
pubmed: 28444019
Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2020 Jun;24(2):181-187
pubmed: 32291547
Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. 2008 Nov;72(11):1595-601
pubmed: 18789544
Angle Orthod. 2001 Aug;71(4):247-56
pubmed: 11510633
J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2009 Apr;37(3):145-54
pubmed: 19028107
Int J Adult Orthodon Orthognath Surg. 2002;17(2):133-9
pubmed: 12099317
J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2011 Oct;69(10):2631-43
pubmed: 21474227
HNO. 2010 Aug;58(8):806-11
pubmed: 20596681
Angle Orthod. 2000 Apr;70(2):129-44
pubmed: 10833001
Angle Orthod. 1997;67(4):309-20
pubmed: 9267580
Materials (Basel). 2020 Jul 09;13(14):
pubmed: 32659947
Angle Orthod. 2012 May;82(3):488-94
pubmed: 21843038
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1987 Dec;92(6):499-505
pubmed: 3479896
Int J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2010 Sep-Dec;3(3):139-46
pubmed: 27616835

Auteurs

Rafał Nowak (R)

Department of Maxillofacial Surgery, Wroclaw Medical University, Borowska 213, 50-556 Wrocław, Poland.

Anna Olejnik (A)

Department of Maxillofacial Surgery, Wroclaw Medical University, Borowska 213, 50-556 Wrocław, Poland.

Hanna Gerber (H)

Department of Maxillofacial Surgery, Wroclaw Medical University, Borowska 213, 50-556 Wrocław, Poland.

Roman Frątczak (R)

NOBO Solutions S.A., Al. Kasztanowa 3A-5, 53-125 Wrocław, Poland.

Ewa Zawiślak (E)

Department of Maxillofacial Surgery, Wroclaw Medical University, Borowska 213, 50-556 Wrocław, Poland.

Classifications MeSH