Cargando…
Tooth Movement Efficacy of Retraction Spring Made of a New Low Elastic Modulus Material, Gum Metal, Evaluated by the Finite Element Method
The aim of this study was to evaluate the tooth movement efficacy of retraction springs made of a new β-titanium alloy, “gum metal”, which has a low Young’s modulus and nonlinear super elasticity. Using double loop springs incorporated into an archwire made of gum metal (GUM) and titanium molybdenum...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8198141/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34072377 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ma14112934 |
Sumario: | The aim of this study was to evaluate the tooth movement efficacy of retraction springs made of a new β-titanium alloy, “gum metal”, which has a low Young’s modulus and nonlinear super elasticity. Using double loop springs incorporated into an archwire made of gum metal (GUM) and titanium molybdenum alloy (TMA), the maxillary anterior teeth were moved distally to close an extraction space. The long-term movements were simulated by the finite element method. Its procedure was constructed of two steps, with the first step being the calculation of the initial tooth movement produced by elastic deformation of the periodontal ligament, and in the second step, the alveolar socket was moved by the initial tooth movement. By repeating these steps, the tooth moved by accumulating the initial tooth movement. The number of repeating calculations was equivalent to an elapsed time. In the GUM and TMA springs, the anterior teeth firstly tipped lingually, and then became upright. As a result of these movements, the canine could move bodily. The amount of space closure in GUM spring was 1.5 times that in TMA spring. The initial tipping angle of the canine in the GUM spring was larger than that in the TMA spring. The number of repeating calculations required for the bodily movement in the GUM spring was about two times that in the TMA spring. It was predicted that the speed of space closure in the GUM spring was smaller than that in the TMA spring. |
---|