ArticleFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology2026
Finite element analysis of impacted canine disimpaction: effects of anchorage systems and T-loop gable bend angles.
Article in Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology, 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: To compare the effects of micro-implant (MI) and transpalatal arch (TPA) combined with T-loops of varying gable bend angles on the distalization of mesially impacted canines. Methods: A finite element model of a mesially impacted left maxillary canine was developed using patient CBCT data. Separate models combining MI or TPA with T-loops featuring α-end angulations of 0°, 15°, and 30° were created. A 1 N retraction force was applied, and canine displacement, stress distribution, and rotation were analyzed. Results: Increasing the α-end angulation from 0° to 30° changed canine movement from uncontrolled tipping (crown distal/root mesial) to controlled translation (concurrent crown-root distal displacement). The 30°angulation achieved the best root control, minimizing crown-root displacement differences along the X-axis. Among the tested conditions, the 30° angulation showed the most favorable root control pattern in this analysis. Greater angulation also produced lingual root torque and intrusion, maintaining root position within the alveolar bone. Both anchorage systems enabled distalization; however, the TPA group showed slightly greater canine displacement with minor mesial movement and extrusion of anchorage teeth. Conclusion: Increasing the T-loop α-end angulation converts uncontrolled tipping to controlled translation by synchronizing crown and root displacement. Angulations of 15°-30°are recommended for optimal root control. While MI offers greater anchorage stability, TPA remains a practical noninvasive alternative despite some anchorage loss.
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.