Biomechanical effect of anteriorly directed extraoral forces on the craniofacial complex: A study using the finite element method

Tanne, Kazuo; Hiraga, Junko S.; K, Kakiuchi; Yamagata, Yuki; Sakuda, M

doi:10.1016/0889-5406(89)90050-4

Cited by 103 publications

(58 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…[26][27][28] When comparing individual studies 22,24,25 with the results of the present study, an agreement with the distribution pattern of stresses in the midface was shown. With a purely anterior directed protraction of the maxilla with 5 N, excessively high strains in the area of the sutures of the nasal bone occurred, which were not observed when applying force anterior caudally or when applying smaller forces (3 N).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 67%

“…The overall model of the facial skull and the cranial base consisted of more than 50,000 individual elements with almost 100,000 nodes. The chosen Young's modulus for the compact bone of the skull was some smaller than published by Tanne et al, 24,25 because maxillary protraction is not only used in juveniles, but also used in 6-to 8-year-old children who have bony structures with higher elasticity. Despite the relatively refined depiction of the complex skull geometry, the current results allow only statements of principle to be made about the distribution of strains with Delaire therapy, since it is an assembled simulation model with predefined properties based on averaged values.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 87%

“…Whereas other authors 22,24,25 measured the distribution of stress upon simulation of a maxillary protraction therapy, we measured strains in strain so that a comparison with Frost thresholds could be facilitat- ed. [26][27][28] When comparing individual studies 22,24,25 with the results of the present study, an agreement with the distribution pattern of stresses in the midface was shown.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Despite the relatively refined depiction of the complex skull geometry, the current results allow only statements of principle to be made about the distribution of strains with Delaire therapy, since it is an assembled simulation model with predefined properties based on averaged values. 22,24,25 The geometric basis for the simulation model was a precise copy of a 25-year-old male skull with an average anatomic situation, but because of the scanning process the geometric accuracy of the simulation mod- el was lower than that of the plastic skull. Nevertheless, the anatomic precision of the used FEM model was much higher than all skull models published so far.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Analysis of Sutural Strain in Maxillary Protraction Therapy

Holberg

Mahaini²,

Rudzki³

2007

The Angle Orthodontist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: The goal of the study was to examine the strain in the sutures of the midface and the cranial base with maxillary protraction therapy and to clarify whether such stretching suggests a skeletal effect of the apparatus employed for that purpose. Materials and Methods: Using a finite elements model, a maxillary protraction therapy was simulated with various force levels and vectors, and the strains appearing at the sutures (in strain) were measured at the midface and the cranial base. The simulation model we employed consisted of 53,555 individual elements; the simulated forces were 2 ϫ 3 N and 2 ϫ 5 N, while the vectors of the applied forces were in the anterior and anterior caudal direction. Results:The maximum measured strains were on average below 10 strain, while higher values were measured only at the nasal bone and at the cranial base at the oval and spinous foramina with anterior directed force vectors (26.4 strain). With an anterior-caudal force vector, the measured values were usually lower. Discussion: The measured strains were on average about hundredfold lower than the Frost thresholds (2000 strain). It does not seem probable that the strains occurring upon maxillary protraction therapy suffice to stimulate any additional bone growth. Conclusion:The good clinical efficacy of maxillary protraction therapy is apparently based, for the most part, on dental effects, while its skeletal effects still remain doubtful.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 67%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 87%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Analysis of Sutural Strain in Maxillary Protraction Therapy

Holberg

Mahaini²,

Rudzki³

2007

The Angle Orthodontist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Elastic properties of materials for orthodontic device, skull bones and teeth are given in Table 1. [20] 13.7 0.3 Trabecular bone [20] 8.0 0.3 Teeth [20] 20.7 0.3…”

Section: Boundary Conditions Geometrical and Materials Parametersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Craniofacial Stress Patterns and Displacements After Activation of Hyrax Device: Finite Element Modelling

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Mechanical stress distribution over the palate by different pacifiers assessed by finite element analysis and clinical data

Freitas,

Castelo,

Noritomi

et al. 2023

Clinical Anatomy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The mechanical behavior of each type of pacifier on rigid structures and their various impacts on orofacial growth have yet to be discovered. The study aimed to evaluate the stress distribution over a child's palate by three types of pacifiers using finite element analysis and clinical and laboratory data. Modulus of elasticity was obtained from 30 specimens comprising 10 of each conventional (A), orthodontic (B), and breast‐shaped (C) pacifiers. Tongue strength was assessed in eight 3‐year‐old children (kPa). A hemi‐maxilla model was obtained from 2‐ to 3‐year‐old skull tomography, and the images of pacifiers A, B, and C were captured using 3D scanning. The Hypermesh® program generated a mesh of 6‐node tetrahedral elements for applying forces in the X, Y, and Z directions to enable a nonlinear analysis. Pacifier B exhibited the highest values for distributed stress on the palate, followed by pacifier A. Pacifier B stimulated the maxilla forward and sideways. In contrast, pacifier A promoted a forward and upward load, favoring a more atresic palate. Pacifiers A and B tended to rotate in the sagittal plane, generating tensions in the anterior incisors and favoring the open bite. Pacifier C exhibited lateral expansion by stress induction over the mid‐palatal suture with less influence on incisor inclination. Pacifiers showed different detrimental stress distributions on the palate. This information can be helpful for improving recommendations given to parents.

show abstract

Biomechanical effect of anteriorly directed extraoral forces on the craniofacial complex: A study using the finite element method

Cited by 103 publications

References 19 publications

Analysis of Sutural Strain in Maxillary Protraction Therapy

Analysis of Sutural Strain in Maxillary Protraction Therapy

Craniofacial Stress Patterns and Displacements After Activation of Hyrax Device: Finite Element Modelling

Mechanical stress distribution over the palate by different pacifiers assessed by finite element analysis and clinical data

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About