A FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF MINI-IMPLANT EFFECTS ON THE PERIODONTIUM: FROM BIOMECHANICAL SIMULATION TO ORAL HEALTH AND MENTAL WELLBEING

Authors

  • C. COJOCARU Grigore T. Popa University of Medicine and Pharmacy Iasi
  • Simona BIDA Grigore T. Popa University of Medicine and Pharmacy Iasi
  • Ancuta GORIUC Grigore T. Popa University of Medicine and Pharmacy Iasi
  • Oana BUTNARU Grigore T. Popa University of Medicine and Pharmacy Iasi
  • F. R. CURCA Grigore T. Popa University of Medicine and Pharmacy Iasi
  • G. ROTUNDU Grigore T. Popa University of Medicine and Pharmacy Iasi
  • S. ADOMNICAI Dentist, Private practice, Bacau, Romania
  • D. I. VIRVESCU Grigore T. Popa University of Medicine and Pharmacy Iasi

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.22551/MSJ.2025.04.15

Abstract

Mini implants are widely used as temporary anchorage devices (TADs) in orthodontics, providing stable and minimally invasive anchorage. However, excessive or misdirected stresses at the bone-implant interface may compromise periodontal integrity and long-term success. To assess stress distribution and bone deformation around orthodontic mini implants under varying insertion angles and load magnitudes using finite element analysis (FEA), and to explore their clinical and wellbeing implications. Materials and methods: A 3D FEA model was developed in SolidWorks, based on CBCT data and manufacturer specifications for a titanium mini implant (8×1.7 mm). The bone model consisted of 2 mm cortical and 8 mm trabecular bone layers. Simulations were performed for insertion angles of 30°, 45°, 60°, and 90° under para-axial forces of 1 N and 5 N. Stress and deformation were evaluated using the von Mises criterion. Results: The highest stress values were recorded at the implant-cortical bone interface, particularly at 90° insertion, and increased with load magnitude. Stress rose from 27 MPa at 1 N to 266 MPa at 5 N, while bone deformation ranged from a few to several tens of micrometers. Insertion geometry and loading intensity significantly influence the biomechanical behavior of peri-implant bone. Moderate insertion angles (45-60°) ensured a more balanced stress distribution and greater stability. Conclusions: Finite element modelling supports personalized, safe, and psychologically comfortable orthodontic treatments, linking biomechanical precision with oral and mental wellbeing.

References

1. Sivamurthy G, Sundari S. Stress distribution patterns at mini-implant site during retraction and intru-sion: a three-dimensional finite element study. Prog Orthod 2016; 17: 4 / doi: 10.1186/s40510-016-0 117-1.

2. Panaite T, Romanec CL, Iacob M, et al Breaking barriers in orthodontics: an experimental study on how stabilization discs improve mini-implant outcomes. Dent J 2025; 13(3): 109 / doi: 10.3390/ dj13030109.

3. Luchian I, Vata I, Martu I, Tatarciuc M, Pendefunda V, Martu S. Challenges in ortho-perio and general dentistry interrelationship: limits and perspectives. Rom J Oral Rehabil 2016; 8(1): 80-83.

4. Becker A, Zogakis I, Luchian I, Chaushu S. Surgical exposure of impacted canines: open or closed surgery? Semin Orthod 2016; 22(1): 27-33 / doi: 10.1053/j.sodo.2015.10.005.

5. Nedzinskaite R, Augyte B, Smailiene D, Vasiliauskas A, Lopatiene K, Zasciurinskiene E, Trakiniene G. Well-being of orthodontic patients wearing orthodontic appliances. Medicina (Kaunas) 2024; 60(8): 1287 / doi: 10.3390/medicina60081287.

6. Luchian I, Martu I, Goriuc A, et al. Salivary PGE₂ as a potential biochemical marker during orthodontic treatment associated with periodontal disease. Rev Chim 2016; 67(10): 2119-2123.

7. Banerjee S, Banerjee R, Shenoy U, Agarkar S, Bhattacharya S. Effect of orthodontic pain on quality of life of patients undergoing orthodontic treatment. Indian J Dent Res 2018; 29(1): 4-9 / doi: 10.4103/ ijdr. IJDR_113_16.

8. Dhammayannarangsi P, Na Lampang S, Tompkins KA, et al. Using the appropriate modulus of elas-ticity of periodontal ligament matters in stress analysis of human first premolar tooth and periodontium structures. Sci Rep 2025; 15: 1549 / doi: 10.1038/s41598-025-85578-y.

9. Huang H, Tang W, Tan Q, Yan B. Development and parameter identification of a visco-hyperelastic model for the periodontal ligament. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater 2017; 68: 210-215 / doi: 10.1016/ j.jmbbm.2017.01.035.

10. Budala DG, Luchian I, Virvescu DI, et al. Salivary biomarkers as a predictive factor in anxiety, de-pression, and stress. Curr Issues Mol Biol 2025; 47: 488.

11. Kaiser AH, Bourauel C. Towards a reduced order model of the periodontal ligament. Sci Rep 2025; 15(1): 5779 / doi: 10.1038/s41598-025-88767-x.

12. Limjeerajarus N, Sratong-On P, Dhammayannarangsi P, et al. Determination of the compressive modulus of elasticity of periodontal ligament derived from human first premolars. Heliyon 2023; 9(3): e14276 / doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon. 2023.e14276.

13. Butnaru OM, Tatarciuc M, Luchian I, et al. AI efficiency in dentistry: comparing artificial intelligence systems with human practitioners in assessing several periodontal parameters. Medicina 2025; 61: 572.

14. Banerjee A, Choudhury S, Rana M, Chakraborty A, Gupta A, Chowdhury AR. Biomechanical analysis of mandibular bone-implant construct with three implant screw design: a finite element study. J Eng Sci Med Diagn Ther 2023; 6(3): 030905.

15. Ghorab H, Ramadan AAF, Nadim MA, Sharaf T. Finite element study to evaluate the stress around mini-implant during canine retraction using continuous and interrupted orthodontic forces. Open Access Maced J Med Sci 2023; 11(D): 36-43.

16. Liu TC, Chang CH, Wong TY, Liu JK. Finite element analysis of miniscrew implants used for ortho-dontic anchorage. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2012; 141(4): 468-476.

17. Singh JR, Kambalyal P, Jain M, Khandelwal P. Revolution in orthodontics: finite element analysis. J Int Soc Prev Community Dent 2016; 6(2): 110-114 / doi: 10.4103/2231-0762. 178743.

18. Veliceasa B, Filip A, Pinzaru R, Pertea M, Ciuntu B, Alexa O. Treatment of displaced intra-articular calcaneal fractures with an interlocking nail (C-nail). J Orthop Trauma 2020; 34(11): e414-e419 / doi: 10.1097/BOT.0000000000001807.

19. Ciuntu BM, Georgescu SO, Cirdeiu C, et al. Negative pressure therapy in wounds surgical treatment. Rev Chim 2017; 68(11): 2687-2690.

20. Stahl E, Keilig L, Abdelgader I, Jäger A, Bourauel C. Numerical analyses of biomechanical behavior of various orthodontic anchorage implants. J Orofac Orthop 2009; 70(2): 115-127 / doi: 10.1007/ s000 56-009-0817-y.

21. Luchian I, Surlari Z, Goriuc A, et al. The influence of orthodontic treatment of periodontal health between challenge and synergy: a narrative review. Dent J 2024; 12: 112.

22. Tekale PD, Patil HA, Garg K, et al. A three-dimensional finite element analysis of mini-implant supported K-loop for maxillary molar distalization. J Indian Orthod Soc 2022; 57(2): 62-69 / doi: 10.1177/ 03015742211044873.

23. Butnaru O, Tatarciuc D, Bida FC, et al. The accuracy of AI-assisted imaging diagnosis versus con-ventional evaluation of dental professionals. Med Surg J-Rev Med Chir Soc Med Nat Iasi 2025; 129(2): 236-245.

24. Kang F, Wu Y, Cui Y, et al. The displacement of teeth and stress distribution on periodontal ligament under different upper incisor proclination with clear aligner in cases of extraction: a finite element study. Prog Orthod 2023; 24: 38 / doi: 10.1186/s40510-023-00491-2.

Additional Files

Published

2025-12-19