Background: Clear aligner treatment has become popular over recent years. It is necessary to identify methods by which we could avoid the bowing effect in extractions with clear aligner. The present study was to identify the appropriate method to design torque movement involving the upper anterior teeth of extraction cases, in order to maintain or improve the axis and torque of the upper anterior teeth with a clear aligner during movement and closure of the extraction space. Results: As the height of the power ridge increased, the rotation angle of the upper central incisor in the sagittal direction decreased gradually and the location of the rotation center changed significantly; the rotation center moved in the apical direction and then changed to the crown side. The highest von-Mises stress of the upper central incisor root, periodontal ligaments, and alveolar bone, showed little change as the power ridge height increased. When the axial inclination of the upper central incisor was normal (U1-SN = 105°), the tendency of movement for the upper central incisor approached translation with a power ridge height of 0.7 mm (corresponding distorted angle: 5.8415). When the axial inclination of the upper central incisor was oversized (U1-SN = 110°), the axial inclination of the upper central incisor reduced to normal following completion of the anterior segment retraction with a power ridge of 0.4 mm (corresponding distorted angle: 3.4265). Conclusion: Analysis indicates that pure palatal tipping movement of the upper anterior teeth is generated without torque control, thus resulting in the bowing effect. The required torque control of the upper anterior teeth with oversize axial inclination is weaker than that of the upper anterior teeth with normal axial inclination because limited torque loss is expected for oversize axial inclination teeth. Variation sensitivity of the rotation center should be considered carefully due to biological problems when designing translation of the upper anterior teeth with normal axial inclination.

Introduction: The effects of upper-molar distalization using clear aligners in combination with Class II elastics for anchorage reinforcement have not been fully investigated yet. The objective of this study is to analyze the movement and stress of the whole dentition and further explore guidelines for the selection of traction methods. Methods: Three-dimensional (3D) finite element models are established to simulate the sequential molar distalization process, including the initial distalization of the 2^nd molar (Set I) and the initial distalization of the 1^st molar (Set II). Each group set features three models: a control model without Class II elastics (model A), Class II elastics attached to the tooth by buttons (model B), and Class II elastics attached to the aligner by precision cutting (model C). The 3D displacements, proclination angles, periodontal ligament (PDL) hydrostatic stress and alveolar bone von Mises stress in the anterior area are recorded. Results: In all of the models, the maxillary anterior teeth are labial and mesial proclined, whereas the distal moving molars exhibit distal buccal inclination with an extrusion tendency. With the combination of Class II elastics, the anchorage was effectively reinforced; model C demonstrates superior anchorage reinforcement with lower stress distribution in comparison with model B. The upper canines in model B present an extrusion tendency. Meanwhile, the mandibular dentition in models B and C experience undesired movement tendencies with little discrepancy from each other. Conclusions: Class II elastics are generally effective for anchorage reinforcement as the upper-molar distalization is performed with clear aligners. Class II elastics attached to an aligner by precision cutting is a superior alternative for maxillary anchorage control in cases that the proclination of upper incisors and extrusion of upper canines are unwanted.

Background: Pathologic tooth migration (PTM) is a common complication of mild to severe periodontitis and proper orthodontic treatment is helpful to alleviate periodontal diseases. The goal of this study is to explore an optimal orthodontic displacement of clear aligner using a three-dimensional (3D) finite element model (FEM).Methods: The cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) data of a patient received invisible orthodontics without diabetes and other systemic diseases were collected. Based on the new classification scheme for periodontal diseases in 2017 (stage I: mild periodontitis, [M1]; stage II: moderate periodontitis, [M2]; stage III: severe periodontitis, [M3]), 3D-FEMs of mandible were established using MIMICS 10.0 and ABAQUS 6.5 softwares. The 3D stress distribution diagrams and stress value of the teeth (left lower incisor, left lower central incisor, right lower lateral incisor, and right lower central incisor) under three different periodontal conditions (M1, M2, and M3) with axial inclination 90° and 100° were obtained by ABAQUS 6.5.Results: The stress of anterior teeth was concentrated in the teeth neck, and became greater when the periodontal condition was worse. The stress value of anterior teeth and the strain at the top of the alveolar crest are greater as the displacement increasing. The stress value of anterior teeth and the strain at the top of the alveolar crest in axial inclination 100° are relatively great compared to those of axial inclination 90°. For patients with excessively inclined anterior teeth (such as 100°), the optimal orthodontic displacement is 0.18 mm. In order to ensure that alveolar ridge crest is not deformed, the displacement is less than 0.18 mm (strain for 0.165 mm), 0.15 mm (strain for 0.167 mm) and 0.10 mm (strain for 0.117 mm) respectively when alveolar bone is normal, resorption 1/3 or 1/3–1/2.Conclusions: The optimal orthodontic displacement for patients (M1, M2, and M3) with excessively inclined anterior teeth (axial inclination 100°) is 0.18 mm. To avoid the strain at the top of the alveolar crest, the optimal displacements for M1, M2 and M3 periodontal disease patients are less than 0.18 mm, 0.15 mm and 0.10 mm, respectively.

Background: Despite the popularity of clear aligner treatment, the effect of the thickness of these aligners has not been fully investigated. The objective of this study was to assess the effects of incisor torque compensation with different thicknesses of clear aligner on the three-dimensional displacement tendency of teeth in cases of extraction.Methods: Three-dimensional finite element models of the maxillary dentition with extracted first premolars, maxilla, periodontal ligaments, attachments, and aligners were constructed and subject to Finite Element Analysis (FEA). Two groups of models were created: (1) with 0.75 mm-thick aligners and (2) with 0.5 mm-thick aligners. A loading method was developed to simulate the action of clear aligners for theen masseretraction of the incisors. Power ridges of different heights were applied to both groups to mimic torque control, and the power ridges favoring the translation of the central incisors were selected. Then, we used ANSYS software to analyze the initial displacement of teeth and the principle stress on the PDL.Results: Distal tipping, lingual tipping and extrusion of the incisors, distal tipping and extrusion of the canines, and mesial tipping and intrusion of the posterior teeth were all generated by clear aligner therapy. With the 0.5 mm-thick aligner, a power ridge of 0.7 mm could cause bodily retraction of the central incisors. With the 0.75 mm-thick aligner, a power ridge of 0.25 mm could cause translation of the central incisors. Aligner torque compensation created by the power ridges generated palatal root torque and intrusion of the incisors, intrusion of the canines, mesial tipping and the intrusion of the second premolar; these effects were more significant with a 0.75 mm-thick aligner. After torque compensation, the stress placed on the periodontal ligament of the incisors was distributed more evenly with the 0.75 mm-thick aligner.Conclusions: The torque compensation caused by power ridges can achieve incisor intrusion and palatal root torque. Appropriate torque compensation with thicker aligners should be designed to ensure bodily retraction of anterior teeth and minimize root resorption, although more attention should be paid to the anchorage control of posterior teeth in cases of extraction.

Introduction: This study aims to investigate the biomechanical effects of anchorage reinforcement using clear aligners (CAs) with microimplants during molar distalization. And also explores potential clinical strategies for enhancing anchorage in the sequential distalization process. Methods: Finite element models were established to simulate the CAs, microimplants, upper dentition, periodontal ligament (PDL), and alveolar bone. In group set I, the 2nd molars underwent a distal movement of 0.25 mm in group set II, the 1st molars were distalized by 0.25 mm after the 2nd molars had been placed to a target position. Each group set consisted of three models: Model A served as the control model, Model B simulated the use of microimplants attached to the aligner through precision cuts, and Model C simulated the use of microimplants attached by buttons. Models B and C were subjected to a series of traction forces. We analyzed the effective contribution ratios of molar distalization, PDL hydrostatic stress, and von Mises stress of alveolar bone. Results: The distalization of the 2nd molars accounted for a mere 52.86% of the 0.25-mm step distance without any reinforcement of anchorage. The remaining percentage was attributed to the mesial movement of anchorage teeth and other undesired movements. Models B and C exhibited an increased effective contribution ratio of molar distalization and a decreased loss of anchorage. However, there was a slight increase in the undesired movement of molar tipping and rotation. In group set II, the 2nd molar displayed a phenomenon of mesial relapse due to the reciprocal force produced by the 1st molar distalization. Moreover, the efficacy of molar distalization in terms of contribution ratio was found to be positively correlated with the magnitude of force applied. In cases where stronger anchorage reinforcement is required, precision cuts is the superior method. Conclusions: The utilization of microimplants in conjunction with CAs can facilitate the effective contribution ratio of molar distalization. However, it is important to note that complete elimination of anchorage loss is not achievable. To mitigate undesired movement, careful planning of anchorage preparation and overcorrection is recommended.

Background: In the present study, the effects of distalizations of one and two molars with different step distances and attachment designs have been analyzed. Methods: A 3D finite element analysis model has been developed in order to determine the tendency of tooth displacement and stress distribution with clear aligner treatment. Results: Under the condition of single-molar distalization, when the step distance was set to 0.25 mm, the total displacement was 0.086 mm for central incisors, 0.080 mm for lateral incisors, 0.084 mm for canines, 0.102 mm for the first premolar and 0.076 mm for the second premolar. The von Mises stress of roots and the principal stress of the periodontal ligament was slightly lower than in the control group when the step distance was set to 0.130 mm. Under the condition of two-molar distalization, when the step distance was set to 0.130 mm, the total displacements for central incisors, lateral incisors and canines as well as both the first and second maxillary molars were basically the same as with a distance of 0.250 mm for one-molar distalization. In addition, when the step distance was 0.130 mm with two-molar distalization, the rotation center of the first and second molar was closer to the apex of the root indicating that the smaller step distance led to more bodily movement during the two-molar distalization. However, displacement tendencies of the first molar and the second molar were basically the same whether horizontal or vertical rectangular attachments were added. Conclusions: A step distance of moving two molars to 0.130 mm can achieve the same reaction force on the anterior teeth as moving one molar 0.250 mm without effects on horizontal or vertical rectangular attachments. Clinical relevance: Our results provide a theoretical basis and guidance for simultaneously moving two molars backward in clinical practice using a clear aligner.