Orthodontically induced root resorption: A critical analysis of finite element studies' input and output

INTRODUCTION

Orthodontically induced inflammatory root resorption (OIIRR) constitutes an undesirable risk connected to orthodontic treatment. Finite element analysis (FEA) is a powerful tool to study the risk of OIIRR. However, its efficiency in predicting OIIRR depends on the insertion of the correct inputs and the selection of an output coherent with the clinical failure mechanism.

METHODS

By combining a systematic review with a 3-dimensional FEA, this article discusses which are the implications of using certain periodontal ligament (PDL) properties (linear and nonlinear models) and failure criteria. Six orthodontic loading regimes were simulated in a maxillary premolar: pure intrusion, buccal tipping, and their combination applied with either a light (25 cN) or a heavy (225 cN) force. Three stress parameters in the PDL were compared: von Mises stress, minimum principal stress_, and hydrostatic stress (σ_H).

RESULTS

The comparison between linear and nonlinear models showed notable differences in stress distribution patterns and magnitudes. For the nonlinear PDL, none of the light-force models reached the critical compressive hydrostatic stress of 4.7 kPa, whereas all the heavy-force models reached it. In addition, the regions of critical compressive σ_H matched with the regions with resorption craters in clinical studies. In linear models, the σ_H critical value of 4.7 kPa was reached even in the light-force scenario.

CONCLUSIONS

Only compressive hydrostatic stress in PDL satisfied the requirements to be used as an FEA indicator of OIIRR. However, the requirements were satisfied only when a nonlinear PDL model was considered.

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.