上颌骨和下颌骨的骨质量能否解释微型种植体失败的差异?

Omar Melendres Ugarte, Ivan Onone Gialain, Naor Maldonado de Carvalho, Gisele Lie Fukuoka, Rafael Yague Ballester, Paolo Maria Cattaneo, Marina Guimarães Roscoe, Josete Barbosa Cruz Meira
{"title":"上颌骨和下颌骨的骨质量能否解释微型种植体失败的差异?","authors":"Omar Melendres Ugarte,&nbsp;Ivan Onone Gialain,&nbsp;Naor Maldonado de Carvalho,&nbsp;Gisele Lie Fukuoka,&nbsp;Rafael Yague Ballester,&nbsp;Paolo Maria Cattaneo,&nbsp;Marina Guimarães Roscoe,&nbsp;Josete Barbosa Cruz Meira","doi":"10.1080/26415275.2020.1863155","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Purpose:</b> This study aimed to compare the risk of orthodontic mini-implant (OMI) failure between maxilla and mandible. A critical analysis of finite-element studies was used to explain the contradiction of the greatest clinical success for OMIs placed in the maxilla, despite the higher quality bone of mandible. <b>Materials and Methods:</b> Four tridimensional FE models were built, simulating an OMI inserted in a low-dense maxilla, control maxilla, control mandible, and high-dense mandible. A horizontal force was applied to simulate an anterior retraction of 2 N (clinical scenario) and 10 N (overloading condition). The intra-bone OMI displacement and the major principal bone strains were used to evaluate the risk of failure due to insufficient primary stability or peri-implant bone resorption. <b>Results:</b> The OMI displacement was far below the 50-100 µm threshold, suggesting that the primary stability would be sufficient in all models. However, the maxilla was more prone to lose its stability due to overload conditions, especially in the low-dense condition, in which major principal bone strains surpassed the pathologic bone resorption threshold of 3000 µstrain. <b>Conclusions:</b> The differences in orthodontic mini-implant failures cannot be explained by maxilla and mandible bone quality in finite-element analysis that does not incorporate the residual stress due to OMI insertion.</p>","PeriodicalId":72378,"journal":{"name":"Biomaterial investigations in dentistry","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/26415275.2020.1863155","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Can maxilla and mandible bone quality explain differences in orthodontic mini-implant failures?\",\"authors\":\"Omar Melendres Ugarte,&nbsp;Ivan Onone Gialain,&nbsp;Naor Maldonado de Carvalho,&nbsp;Gisele Lie Fukuoka,&nbsp;Rafael Yague Ballester,&nbsp;Paolo Maria Cattaneo,&nbsp;Marina Guimarães Roscoe,&nbsp;Josete Barbosa Cruz Meira\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/26415275.2020.1863155\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b>Purpose:</b> This study aimed to compare the risk of orthodontic mini-implant (OMI) failure between maxilla and mandible. A critical analysis of finite-element studies was used to explain the contradiction of the greatest clinical success for OMIs placed in the maxilla, despite the higher quality bone of mandible. <b>Materials and Methods:</b> Four tridimensional FE models were built, simulating an OMI inserted in a low-dense maxilla, control maxilla, control mandible, and high-dense mandible. A horizontal force was applied to simulate an anterior retraction of 2 N (clinical scenario) and 10 N (overloading condition). The intra-bone OMI displacement and the major principal bone strains were used to evaluate the risk of failure due to insufficient primary stability or peri-implant bone resorption. <b>Results:</b> The OMI displacement was far below the 50-100 µm threshold, suggesting that the primary stability would be sufficient in all models. However, the maxilla was more prone to lose its stability due to overload conditions, especially in the low-dense condition, in which major principal bone strains surpassed the pathologic bone resorption threshold of 3000 µstrain. <b>Conclusions:</b> The differences in orthodontic mini-implant failures cannot be explained by maxilla and mandible bone quality in finite-element analysis that does not incorporate the residual stress due to OMI insertion.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":72378,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Biomaterial investigations in dentistry\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-01-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/26415275.2020.1863155\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Biomaterial investigations in dentistry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/26415275.2020.1863155\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Biomaterial investigations in dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/26415275.2020.1863155","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

目的:本研究旨在比较上颌和下颌骨微型种植体(OMI)正畸失败的风险。一项对有限元研究的批判性分析被用来解释尽管下颌骨质量更高,但放置在上颌的OMIs临床成功率最高的矛盾。材料与方法:建立4个三维有限元模型,模拟OMI插入低密度上颌、对照上颌、对照下颌骨和高密度下颌骨。施加一个水平力来模拟2 N(临床情况)和10 N(超载情况)的前缩。使用骨内OMI位移和主要骨应变来评估由于初级稳定性不足或种植体周围骨吸收而失败的风险。结果:OMI位移远低于50-100µm阈值,表明所有模型的初级稳定性都是足够的。然而,上颌骨更容易因过载而失去稳定性,特别是在低密度条件下,主要骨应变超过了3000µstrain的病理骨吸收阈值。结论:在有限元分析中,如果不考虑OMI植入的残余应力,正畸微型种植体失败的差异不能用上颌和下颌骨的骨质量来解释。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

摘要图片

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Can maxilla and mandible bone quality explain differences in orthodontic mini-implant failures?

Purpose: This study aimed to compare the risk of orthodontic mini-implant (OMI) failure between maxilla and mandible. A critical analysis of finite-element studies was used to explain the contradiction of the greatest clinical success for OMIs placed in the maxilla, despite the higher quality bone of mandible. Materials and Methods: Four tridimensional FE models were built, simulating an OMI inserted in a low-dense maxilla, control maxilla, control mandible, and high-dense mandible. A horizontal force was applied to simulate an anterior retraction of 2 N (clinical scenario) and 10 N (overloading condition). The intra-bone OMI displacement and the major principal bone strains were used to evaluate the risk of failure due to insufficient primary stability or peri-implant bone resorption. Results: The OMI displacement was far below the 50-100 µm threshold, suggesting that the primary stability would be sufficient in all models. However, the maxilla was more prone to lose its stability due to overload conditions, especially in the low-dense condition, in which major principal bone strains surpassed the pathologic bone resorption threshold of 3000 µstrain. Conclusions: The differences in orthodontic mini-implant failures cannot be explained by maxilla and mandible bone quality in finite-element analysis that does not incorporate the residual stress due to OMI insertion.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
14 weeks
期刊最新文献
Recipient of Biomaterial Investigations in Dentistry's Young Author Award 2023. Reliability and agreement of root length measurements during orthodontic treatment in images from different CBCT machines using multiplanar reconstruction. The sealing ability of different endodontic biomaterials as an intra-orifice barrier: evaluation with high-performance liquid chromatography. An in vitro study on the influence of laser-activated irrigation on infiltration and leakage of a dual curing-resin cement as an endodontic sealer Accumulation and removal of Streptococcus mutans biofilm on enamel and root surfaces in vitro
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1