ArticleJournal of orofacial orthopedics = Fortschritte der Kieferorthopadie : Organ/official journal Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Kieferorthopadie2025
Comparative biomechanical analysis of four different tooth- and bone-borne frog appliances for molar distalization : A three-dimensional finite element study.
Article in Journal of orofacial orthopedics = Fortschritte der Kieferorthopadie : Organ/official journal Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Kieferorthopadie, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe purpose of this study was to analyze the biomechanical effects of four different designs of frog appliances for molar distalization using finite element analysis.
methodsA three-dimensional finite element model including complete dentition, periodontal ligament, palatine, and alveolar bone was established. Four types of frog appliances were designed to simulate maxillary molar distalization: tooth-button-borne (Type A), bone-borne (Type B), bone-button-borne (Type C), and tooth-bone-borne (Type D) frog appliances. A force of 10 N was applied simulating a screw in the anteroposterior direction. To assess the von Mises stress distribution and the resultant displacements in the teeth and periodontal tissues, geometric nonlinear theory was utilized.
resultsCompared to the conventional tooth-borne frog appliance (Type A), the bone-borne frog appliances showed increased first molar distalization with enhanced mesiolingual rotation and distal tipping, but the labial inclination and intrusion of the incisors were insignificant. When replacing the palatal acrylic button with miniscrews (Types B and D), more anchorage forces were transmitted from the first premolar to palatine bone, which was further dispersed by the assistance of a palatal acrylic button (Type C).
conclusionsCompared to tooth-borne frog appliances, the bone-borne variants demonstrated a clear advantage for en masse molar distalization. The combined anchorage system utilizing palatal acrylic buttons and miniscrews (Type C) offers the most efficient stress distribution, minimizing force concentration on the palatine bone.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39179928What 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.