Background/Objectives: Oral breathing is a common condition, particularly in children, and it is associated with significant changes in craniofacial development, dentomaxillary anomalies, and overall health. Despite extensive research, the role of oral breathing in the development of malocclusion remains controversial, with debates on whether it is a causative factor or a secondary adaptation to existing craniofacial issues. Methods: This narrative review synthesizes studies published in the last 15 years, focusing on the impact of oral breathing on dentofacial development and mandibular posture. A comprehensive search was conducted on four electronic databases (Embase, Medline, ProQUEST, Scopus) using keywords related to oral breathing, malocclusion, mandibular posture, and craniofacial development. Studies were included if they focused on the effects of oral breathing on craniofacial morphology, malocclusion, and postural changes in children and adolescents aged 6–18 years. Results: Results indicate a strong link between oral breathing and dentofacial changes such as adenoid facies, Class II malocclusion, posterior crossbite, and anterior open bite. It causes cranial posture changes, particularly increased craniocervical extension, as a compensatory mechanism to maintain airway patency. Conclusions: Oral breathing is a risk factor for malocclusion prognosis, especially in growing children. Dentofacial changes in oral breathers include adenoid facies, convex facial profile, and increased lower facial height. Oral breathing also leads to significant changes in cranial posture, often accompanied by mandibular, lingual, and palatal alterations.

The accuracy of five failure criterions employed in the study of periodontal ligaments (PDL) during periodontal breakdown under orthodontic movements was assessed. Based on cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) examinations, nine 3D models of the second lower premolar with intact periodontium were created and individually subjected to various levels of horizontal bone loss. 0.5 N of intrusion, extrusion, rotation, tipping, and translation was applied. A finite Elements Analysis (FEA) was performed, and stresses were quantitatively and qualitatively analyzed. In intact periodontium, Tresca and Von Mises (VM) stresses were lower than maximum physiological hydrostatic pressure (MHP), while maximum principal stress S1, minimum principal stress S3, and pressure were higher. In reduced periodontium, Tresca and VM stresses were lower than MHP for intrusion, extrusion, and the apical third of the periodontal ligament for the other movements. 0.5 N of rotation, translation and tipping induced cervical third stress exceeding MHP. Only Tresca (quantitatively more accurate) and VM are adequate for the study of PDL (resemblance to ductile), being qualitatively similar. A 0.5 N force seems safe in the intact periodontium, and for intrusion and extrusion up to 8 mm bone loss. The amount of force should be reduced to 0.1–0.2 N for rotation, 0.15–0.3 N for translation and 0.2–0.4 N for tipping in 4–8 mm periodontal breakdown. S1, S3, and pressure criteria provided only qualitative results.

This study examines 0.6 N–4.8 N as the maximum orthodontic force to be applied to dental pulp and apical NVB on intact and 1–8 mm reduced periodontal-ligament (PDL), in connection with movement and ischemic, necrotic and resorptive risk. In addition, it examines whether the Tresca finite-element-analysis (FEA) criterion is more adequate for the examination of dental pulp and its apical NVB. Eighty-one (nine patients, with nine models for each patient) anatomically correct models of the periodontium, with the second lower-premolar reconstructed with its apical NVB and dental pulp were assembled, based on X-ray CBCT (cone-beam-computed-tomography) examinations and subjected to 0.6 N, 1.2 N, 2.4 N and 4.8 N of intrusion, extrusion, translation, rotation, and tipping. The Tresca failure criterion was applied, and the shear stress was assessed. Forces of 0.6 N, 1.2 N, and 2.4 N had negligible effects on apical NVB and dental pulp up to 8 mm of periodontal breakdown. A force of 4.8 N was safely applied to apical NVB on the intact periodontium only. Rotation and tipping seemed to be the most invasive movements for the apical NVB. For the dental pulp, only the translation and rotation movements seemed to display a particular risk of ischemia, necrosis, and internal orthodontic-resorption for both coronal (0–8 mm of loss) and radicular pulp (4–8 mm of loss), despite the amount of stress being lower than the MHP. The Tresca failure criterion seems more suitable than other criteria for apical NVB and dental pulp.

This Finite Elements Analysis (FEA) assessed the accuracy of Tresca failure criteria (maximum shear stress) for the study of external root resorption. Additionally, the tooth absorption–dissipation ability was assessed. Overall, 81 models of the second mandibular premolar, out of a total of 324 simulations, were involved. Five orthodontic movements (intrusion, extrusion, rotation, translation, and tipping) were simulated under 0.6 N and 1.2 N in a horizontal progressive periodontal breakdown simulation of 0–8 mm. In all simulations, Tresca criteria accurately displayed the localized areas of maximum stress prone to external resorption risks, seeming to be adequate for the study of the resorptive process. The localized areas were better displayed in the radicular dentine–cementum component than in the entire tooth structure. The rotation and translation seem prone to a higher risk of external root resorption after 4 mm of loss. The resorptive risks seem to increase along with the progression of periodontal breakdown if the same amount of applied force is guarded. The localized resorption-prone areas follow the progression of bone loss. The two light forces displayed similar extensions of maximum stress areas. The stress displayed in the coronal dentine decreases along with the progression of bone loss. The absorption–dissipation ability of the tooth is about 87.99–97.99% of the stress.

Herein Finite elements analysis (FEA) study assesses the adequacy and accuracy of five failure criteria (Von Mises (VM), Tresca, maximum principal (S1), minimum principal (S3), and Hydrostatic pressure) for the study of tooth as a structure (made of enamel, dentin, and cement), along with its stress absorption–dissipation ability. Eighty-one 3D models of the second lower premolar (with intact and 1–8 mm reduced periodontium) were subjected to five orthodontic forces (intrusion, extrusion, tipping, rotation, and translation) of 0.5 N (approx. 50 gf) (in a total of 405 FEA simulations). Only the Tresca and VM criteria showed biomechanically correct stress display during the 0–8 mm periodontal breakdown simulation, while the other three showed various unusual biomechanical stress display. All five failure criteria displayed comparable quantitative stress results (with Tresca and VM producing the highest of all), showing the rotational and translational movements to produce the highest amount of stress, while intrusion and extrusion, the lowest. The tooth structure absorbed and dissipated most of the stress produced by the orthodontic loads (from a total of 0.5 N/50 gf only 0.125 N/12.5 gf reached PDL and 0.01 N/1 gf the pulp and NVB). The Tresca criterion seems to be more accurate than Von Mises for the study of tooth as structure.

Background and Objectives: This numerical analysis investigated the biomechanical behavior of the mandibular bone as a structure subjected to 0.5 N of orthodontic force during periodontal breakdown. Additionally, the suitability of the five most used failure criteria (Von Mises (VM), Tresca (T), maximum principal (S1), minimum principal (S3), and hydrostatic pressure (HP)) for the study of bone was assessed, and a single criterion was identified for the study of teeth and the surrounding periodontium (by performing correlations with other FEA studies). Materials and Methods: The finite element analysis (FEA) employed 405 simulations over eighty-one mandibular models with variable levels of bone loss (0–8 mm) and five orthodontic movements (intrusion, extrusion, tipping, rotation, and translation). For the numerical analysis of bone, the ductile failure criteria are suitable (T and VM are adequate for the study of bone), with Tresca being more suited. S1, S3, and HP criteria, due to their distinctive design dedicated to brittle materials and liquids/gas, only occasionally correctly described the bone stress distribution. Results: Only T and VM displayed a coherent and correlated gradual stress increase pattern for all five movements and levels of the periodontal breakdown. The quantitative values provided by T and VM were the highest (for each movement and level of bone loss) among all five criteria. The MHP (maximum physiological hydrostatic pressure) was exceeded in all simulations since the mandibular bone is anatomically less vascularized, and the ischemic risks are reduced. Only T and VM displayed a correlated (both qualitative and quantitative) stress increase for all five movements. Both T and VM displayed rotation and translation, closely followed by tipping, as stressful movements, while intrusion and extrusion were less stressful for the mandibular bone. Conclusions: Based on correlations with earlier numerical studies on the same models and boundary conditions, T seems better suited as a single unitary failure criterion for the study of teeth and the surrounding periodontium.