ReviewPolymers2024
A Comparative Analysis of Mechanical Properties of Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) vs. Standard Materials Used in Orthodontic Fixed Appliances: A Systematic Review.
Review in Polymers, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Review
- Role of polyetheretherketone (PEEK) in arthroplasty and orthopaedics: a review of biomechanical properties, surface modifications, and clinical outcomes.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2026Review
- Effect of Infill Density on the Mechanical Properties of Natural Peek Processed by Additive Manufacturing.Polymers · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Polyetheretherketone (PEEK), an organic thermoplastic polymer, has gained interest in dentistry due to its excellent mechanical strength, flexibility, and biocompatibility. Furthermore, the ability to utilize CAD/CAM in the fabrication of PEEK enhances accuracy, reliability, and efficiency while also saving time. Hence, several orthodontic studies have explored the utilization of PEEK in various applications, such as archwires, brackets, fixed lingual retainers, palatal expansion devices, transpalatal arches, Tübingen palatal plates, different types of space maintainers, mini-implant insertion guides, and more. However, a complete systematic review of the available data comparing the performance of PEEK with traditional orthodontic materials has not yet been conducted. Therefore, this systematic review seeks to assess if PEEK material meets the required mechanical criteria to serve as an alternative to conventional orthodontic appliances. To ensure clarity and precision, this review will specifically concentrate on fixed appliances. This systemic review followed the PRISMA guidelines and utilized databases including PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Springer, Web of Science, and Wiley. Searches were restricted to English language articles from January 2013 to February 2024. Keywords such as "Polyetheretherketone" or "PEEK" and "Orthodontic" or "Orthodontic device" or "Orthodontic materials" were employed across all databases. Nine studies were incorporated, covering orthodontic archwires, brackets, and fixed lingual retainers. Based on the reviewed literature, PEEK demonstrates promising potential in orthodontic fixed appliances, offering advantages in force delivery, friction reduction, and aesthetic appeal. Further research is needed to fully explore its capabilities and optimize its application in clinical practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.