The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

Register      Login

SEARCH WITHIN CONTENT

FIND ARTICLE

Volume / Issue

Online First

Archive
Volume  23 (2022)
Volume  22 (2021)
Volume  21 (2020)
Volume  20 (2019)
Volume  19 (2018)
Volume  18 (2017)
Volume  17 (2016)
Volume  16 (2015)
Volume  15 (2014)
Volume  14 (2013)
Volume  13 (2012)
Volume  12 (2011)
Volume  11 (2010)
Volume  10 (2009)
Volume  9 (2008)
Volume  8 (2007)
Volume  7 (2006)
Volume  6 (2005)
Volume  5 (2004)
Volume  4 (2003)
Volume  3 (2002)
Volume  2 (2001)
Volume  1 (1999)
Related articles

VOLUME 19 , ISSUE 7 ( 2018 ) > List of Articles

ORIGINAL RESEARCH

Evaluation of Biomechanical Properties of Four Loops at Different Activation: A Finite Element Method Study

PG Francis, TP Mohamed Haris, Vincy A Margaret, Gazanafer Roshan, Vineeth Menon, Venith Jojee

Keywords : Biomechanical properties, Finite element analysis, Kalra Simultaneous Intrusion and Retraction loop, Omega loop, T loop, Tear drop loop, Titanium molybdenum alloy

Citation Information : Francis P, Haris TM, Margaret VA, Roshan G, Menon V, Jojee V. Evaluation of Biomechanical Properties of Four Loops at Different Activation: A Finite Element Method Study. J Contemp Dent Pract 2018; 19 (7):778-784.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-2336

License: CC BY-NC 3.0

Published Online: 01-07-2018

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2018; The Author(s).


Abstract

Aim: The aim of the study was to evaluate the force, moment, and moment/force ratio (M/F) generated by activating T loop, Kalra Simultaneous Intrusion and Retraction (KSIR) loop, Omega loop, and Teardrop loop made of titanium molybdenum alloy (TMA) wire with different preactivation bends at 1, 2, and 4 mm activation. Materials and methods: Finite element method (FEM) models of the four loops were created and different preactivation bends were placed. The loops were then activated and analyzed for force, moment, and M/F ratio using ANSYS software. Results: In loops without preactivation bends, highest force values were generated by Omega loop, whereas T loop had the least force value. The mean value for the M/F in the alpha segment was almost similar. In loops with preactivation bend, the force was highest in Teardrop loop, whereas T loop had the least force value. The mean value for the M/F in the alpha segment was almost similar in all the loops. Conclusion: T loop with preactivation bend shows the most favorable properties. Clinical significance: T loop is comparatively reliable for the frictionless mechanics for the space closure than the other loops evaluated in clinical use.

PDF Share
  1. Raboud D, Faulkner M, Lipsett A, Haberstock D. Threedimensional effects in retraction appliance design. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1997 Oct;112(4):378-392.
  2. Ren Y, Maltha JC, Kuijpers-Jagtman AM. Optimum force magnitude for orthodontic tooth movement (a systematic literature review). Angle Orthod 2003 Feb;73(1):86-92.
  3. Nanda R. Biomechanics in clinical orthodontics. Philadelphia, PA: Saunders; 1997.
  4. Kalra V. Simultaneous intrusion and retraction of the anterior teeth. J Clin Orthod 1998 Sep;32(9):535-540.
  5. Konda P, Tarannum, SA. Basic principles of finite element method and its applications in orthodontics. J Pharmaceutical Biomed Sci 2012;16(16):1-8.
  6. Tanne K, Sakuda M, Burstone C. Three-dimensional finite element analysis for stress in the periodontal tissue by orthodontic forces. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1987;92(6): 499-505.
  7. Puente M, Galbán L, Cobo J. Initial stress differences between tipping and torque movements. A three-dimensional finite element analysis. Eur J Orthod 1996 Aug;18(1):329-339.
  8. Burstone CJ. The segmented arch approach to space closure. Am J Orthod 1982 Nov;82(5):361-378.
  9. Burstone C, Goldberg A. Beta titanium: a new orthodontic alloy. Am J Orthod 1980 Feb;77(2):121-132.
  10. Szuhanek CA, Fleser T, Glavan FL. Mechanical behaviour of orthodontic TMA wires. Wseas Trans Biol Biomed 2010 Jul;7(3):277-286.
  11. Chen J, Markham DL, Katona TR. Effects of T-loop geometry on its forces and moments. Angle Orthod 2000 Feb;70(1):48-51.
  12. Safavi MR, Geramy A, Khezri AK. M/F ratios of four different closing loops: 3D analysis using the finite element method (FEM). Aust Orthod J 2006 Nov;22(2):121-126.
  13. Rodrigues EU, Maruo H, Guariza Filho O, Tanaka O, Camargo ES. Mechanical evaluation of space closure loops in orthodontics. Braz Oral Res 2011 Jan-Feb;25(1):63-68.
  14. Vibhute PJ, Srivastava SS, Kohli VS. Evaluation of the teardrop and snail loop designs for force system with two different preactivations: computer loop simulation program study. J Indian Orthod Soc 2009;43(3):50-60.
  15. Hoenigl KD, Freudenthaler J, Marcotte MR, Bantleon HP. The centered T-loop—a new way of preactivation. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1995;108(2):149-53.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.

We use cookies on this site to enhance your user experience.

By clicking any link on this page you are giving your consent for us to set cookies.