ArticleScientific reports2025
Assessment of the biomechanical performance of digitally manufactured space maintainers: a finite element analysis.
Article in Scientific reports, 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.
- Digital Manufacturing and Periodontal Performance of CAD/CAM-Customized Orthodontic Molar Bands Compared with Standard Stainless-Steel Bands.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Trial
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
backgroundThe aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of band and loop space maintainers, fabricated using digital technologies, and the luting cements used for their fixation, on mesio-distal tooth movement using the Finite Element Analysis method. Additionally, the biomechanical performance of the materials was analyzed by comparing the maximum Von Mises stress distribution. METHODOLOGY: A total of fifteen finite element models were created using combinations of five different band and loop materials (BruxZir, Conventional, Trilor, polyetheretherketone and carbon fiber-reinforced polyetheretherketone) and three types of luting cements: conventional glass ionomer cement, resin-modified glass ionomer cement, and dual-cure resin cement. A vertical force of 70 Newton was applied in the occluso-gingival direction at the band-loop junction in each model. Stress distribution and potential failure zones were analyzed using the finite element analysis method.
resultsAmong the tested materials, BruxZir exhibited the least amount of displacement and generated the lowest stress on the tooth. It was followed by Conventional, Trilor, and carbon fiber-reinforced polyetheretherketone and polyetheretherketone. Polyetheretherketone showed the highest level of displacement. When comparing luting cements, the resin-modified glass ionomer, which has the lowest elastic modulus, caused the greatest mesial movement. This was followed by the self-adhesive resin cement and the conventional glass ionomer cement.
conclusionsThe integration of digital technologies in pediatric dentistry enables the clinical use of space maintainers fabricated from various advanced materials. However, further clinical studies are necessary to assess the long-term success and biocompatibility of these digital materials.
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.