ArticleJournal of orthodontic science2024
Comparative evaluation of effectiveness of three versus four mini-implants for simultaneous intrusion and retraction of maxillary anterior teeth: A 3D FEM study.
Article in Journal of orthodontic science, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Stress distribution and displacement in maxillary anterior teeth during simultaneous intrusion and retraction using a 3D FEA model.Bioinformation · 2026Article
- Optimizing Miniscrew Stability: A Finite Element Study of Titanium Screw Insertion Angles.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate and compare the displacement pattern of maxillary anterior teeth in the sagittal and vertical planes and evaluate the stress distribution in pdl, bone, teeth of the maxillary anterior region, and around the mini-implants during simultaneous en-masse retraction and intrusion using two, three, and four mini-implants combinations.
methodsA three-dimensional FEM model of maxillary teeth and periodontal ligament housed in the alveolar bone with extracted first premolarswasgenerated. The models were broadly divided into three groups according to the number of mini-implants. Mini-implants were placed bilaterally between the second premolar and molar in group I, and along with bilateral implants, an additional mid-implant was placed between the central incisors as in group II, whereas in group III, anterior mini-implants were placed in between lateral incisors and canine bilaterally.
resultsThe two mini-implant model showed the maximum amount of retraction in the sagittal plane followed by three and four mini-implant models. In the vertical plane, all six anterior teeth showed intrusion only in the four mini-implant model. The stress in cortical bone, cancellous bone, PDL, around the mini-implants, and in lateral incisor was maximum in the three mini-implant model, followed by four mini-implants with the least stress in the two mini-implant model.
conclusionThe four mini-implant model is better than the three and two mini-implants model as there is a more even distribution of force in the four mini-implants model as compared to the three mini-implants model.
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.