ArticleAmerican journal of translational research2025
Three-dimensional finite element analysis of the influence of different stress modes in invisible aligners on anterior teeth retraction.
Article in American journal of translational research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo investigate the effects of different stress application methods of invisible aligners on anterior tooth retraction using three-dimensional finite element analysis.
methodsAn adult patient with maxillary protrusion undergoing orthodontic treatment with the extraction of the first premolars was selected for modeling. Five working conditions were simulated: ① Invisible aligner applying force for overall retraction of the maxillary anterior teeth; ② Invisible aligner combined with a micro - implant placed at the canine region's precise cutting site, applying a 1N force for overall anterior retraction; ③ Same as condition 2, with an additional 1 N force applied between the anchorage micro-implant near the maxillary central incisors and the aligner; ④ Invisible aligner applying a 1 N force at the canine region's precise cutting site for overall retraction; ⑤ Invisible aligner applying force combined with power ridge technology for root - controlled retraction of anterior teeth. Displacement and stress measurements-including displacement and stress at the coronal-radicular junction and periodontal ligament, as well as their components along the X (mesiodistal), Y (labiolingual), and Z (vertical) axes under different working conditions-were compared.
resultsTotal tooth displacements were similar across all conditions (range: 0.23197-0.23276 mm), with conditions ③ and ⑤ showing slightly lower displacement, though differences were not statistically significant. Stress at the coronal-radicular junction varied between 63.298-63.964 MPa, with conditions ② and ④ exhibiting slightly higher values. Condition ⑤ demonstrated a slight reduction in junction stress (63.703 MPa), attributed to root - control technology. Periodontal ligament stress showed a gradual increase from 0.41426 MPa (condition ①) to 0.41634 MPa (condition ⑤), representing a minimal overall change. Displacement was predominantly along the Y axis (approximately 0.205-0.206 mm), with smaller movements in the X (0.055-0.056 mm) and Z (0.095-0.096 mm) directions.
conclusionAll 5 working conditions produced comparable displacement outcomes, with condition ⑤ offering an advantage in reducing stress at the coronal-radicular junction, suggesting a benefit of root-controlled retraction in clinical application.
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.