Systematic review quantifies biomechanical impacts on tooth movements and malocclusions, highlighting orthodontic appliance interactions.
Orthodontic therapy leverages a variety of biomechanical principles to facilitate targeted tooth movements aimed at enhancing dental esthetics and correcting malocclusions. This article systematically reviews the biomechanical impacts of orthodontic interventions, including the mechanical stresses exerted on teeth, adjacent periodontal tissues, and alveolar bone. We aim to comprehensively quantify these effects to the fullest extent possible. The interaction between orthodontic appliances, such as brackets, wires, and auxiliary aids, and the oral environment plays a critical role in determining the biomechanical responses within the craniofacial complex. Recent advances in materials and technology have significantly transformed orthodontic biomechanics, enabling more effective and predictable tooth movements while minimizing adverse effects. Key biomechanical considerations include the magnitude, direction, duration, and distribution of forces, all of which critically influence biomechanical responses and treatment outcomes. In addition, certain biomechanical effects are named after real-life analogies or individuals, reflecting their origins or conceptual basis. This review aims to elucidate these analogies and the rationale behind such nomenclature. Furthermore, the interplay between orthodontic biomechanics and biological processes, such as bone remodeling and tissue adaptation, underscores the dynamic and complex nature of orthodontic treatment. A thorough understanding of these biomechanical principles is essential for orthodontists to optimize treatment planning, mechanics, and outcomes, thereby delivering effective and stable results for patients. This review consolidates current knowledge and examines emerging trends in orthodontic biomechanics, providing valuable insights for clinicians and researchers in the field.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Siddalingappa et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: