A Novel Rat Model of Orthodontic Tooth Movement Using Temporary Skeletal Anchorage Devices: 3D Finite Element Analysis and<i>In Vivo</i>Validation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this animal study was to develop a model of orthodontic tooth movement using a microimplant as a TSAD in rodents. A finite element model of the TSAD in alveolar bone was built using μCT images of rat maxilla to determine the von Mises stresses and displacement in the alveolar bone surrounding the TSAD. For in vivo validation of the FE model, Sprague-Dawley rats (n = 25) were used and a Stryker 1.2 × 3 mm microimplant was inserted in the right maxilla and used to protract the right first permanent molar using a NiTi closed coil spring. Tooth movement measurements were taken at baseline, 4 and 8 weeks. At 8 weeks, animals were euthanized and tissues were analyzed by histology and EPMA. FE modeling showed maximum von Mises stress of 45 Mpa near the apex of TSAD but the average von Mises stress was under 25 Mpa. Appreciable tooth movement of 0.62 ± 0.04 mm at 4 weeks and 1.99 ± 0.14 mm at 8 weeks was obtained. Histological and EPMA results demonstrated no active bone remodeling around the TSAD at 8 weeks depicting good secondary stability. This study provided evidence that protracted tooth movement is achieved in small animals using TSADs.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".