ArticleBMC oral health2026
Biomechanical analysis of interradicular and infrazygomatic miniscrew anchorage during two-step and en-masse retraction: A finite element study.
Article in BMC oral health, 2026. 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
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of interradicular and infrazygomatic miniscrew anchorages on tooth movement and von Mises stress distribution during two-step and en-masse retraction using three-dimensional finite element analysis.
methodsEight finite element models were constructed combining two retraction mechanics (en-masse and two-step), two anchorage types (infrazygomatic and interradicular miniscrews), and two power arm heights (3 and 6 mm). A 150 g retraction force was applied along the line connecting the miniscrew and power arm. Static structural analyses were performed in ANSYS to calculate tooth displacement (x-, y-, and z-axes) and von Mises stress distribution.
resultsStress was mainly concentrated in the cortical bone around miniscrew insertion areas, as well as on the lateral incisors and canines. Increasing the power arm height from 3 mm to 6 mm reduced uncontrolled tipping and extrusion, improving biomechanical control. Infrazygomatic anchorage produced less tipping and extrusion than interradicular anchorage in both mechanics. Two-step retraction generally showed slightly more controlled tooth movement compared with en-masse retraction.
conclusionsThis finite element simulation showed that the two-step retraction approach with infrazygomatic anchorage and a 6-mm power arm resulted in comparatively reduced tipping and a more distributed stress pattern under the conditions of the present model. However, complete translational movement was not achieved in any model. As finite element models cannot fully replicate clinical conditions, these findings should be interpreted with caution and validated through clinical studies.
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.