Table of Contents Author Guidelines Submit a Manuscript
Journal of Healthcare Engineering
Volume 2019, Article ID 9687127, 9 pages
https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/9687127
Research Article

Biomechanical Effects of Different Auxiliary-Aligner Designs for the Extrusion of an Upper Central Incisor: A Finite Element Analysis

1AirNivol s.r.l., Via Giuntini 25, 56023 Navacchio, Pisa, Italy
2Department of Neurosciences, Reproductive Sciences and Oral Sciences, University of Naples Federico II, Via Pansini 5, 80131 Naples, Italy
3Department of Civil and Industrial Engineering, University of Pisa, Largo Lucio Lazzarino, 56122 Pisa, Italy

Correspondence should be addressed to R. Savignano; moc.liamg@onangivasotrebor

Received 8 November 2018; Revised 6 March 2019; Accepted 18 July 2019; Published 7 August 2019

Guest Editor: Bernd Lapatki

Copyright © 2019 R. Savignano et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

Aim. To evaluate the biomechanical effects of four different auxiliary-aligner combinations for the extrusion of a maxillary central incisor and to define the most effective design through finite element analysis (FEA). Materials and Methods. A full maxillary arch (14 teeth) was modelled by combining two different imaging techniques: cone beam computed tomography and surface-structured light scan. The appliance and auxiliary element geometries were created by exploiting computer-aided design (CAD) procedures. The reconstructed digital models were imported within the finite element solver (Ansys® 17). For the extrusion movement, the authors compared the aligner without an attachment with three auxiliary-aligner designs: a rectangular palatal attachment, a rectangular buccal attachment, and an ellipsoid buccal attachment. The resulting force-moment (MF) system delivered by the aligner to the target tooth and the tooth displacement were calculated for each scenario. Results. The maximum tooth displacement along the z-axis (0.07 mm) was obtained with the rectangular palatal attachment, while the minimum (0.02 mm) was obtained without any attachments. With the ellipsoid attachment, the highest undesired moments Mx and My were found. The rectangular palatal attachment showed the highest Fz (2.0 N) with the lowest undesired forces (Fx = 0.4 N; Fy = −0.2 N). Conclusions. FEA demonstrated that the rectangular palatal attachment can improve the effectiveness of the appliance for the extrusion of an upper central incisor.