top of page
Premolar extraction protocols Part 2 What you may not know…
Premolar extraction protocols Part 1 What you may not know…
IPR accuracy exposed! What this study reveals may surprise you
Does Trimline matter in Aligners?
Open bite + Aligners = Gold standard?
Do you know how to do IPR safely?
How well do aligners perform in closing premolar extraction spaces?
Extrusion movements with Clear Aligners
Fixed braces vs Clear Aligners
Bite Jump with Clear aligners
How should we close a Maxillary Diastema with Clear Aligners?
Gum recession during Aligner treatment - What should you do?
The importance of attachments during expansion
Dental alveolar expansion with clear aligners - tips
Understanding Aligner Limitations in Arch Expansion 📚🔍
Ghost IPR in Clear Aligners
Peg laterals and Clear Aligners
Clear Aligner Patient Tips
Expansion with Clear Aligners
Upper Sequential Distalisation amount
Difficult Movements with Clear Aligners

How should we close a Maxillary Diastema with Clear Aligners?

How to close dental spaces with Clear Aligners?

Title & Authors

Effects of Attachment of Plastic Aligner in Closing of Diastema of Maxillary Dentition by Finite Element Method
Yukiko Yokoi, Atsushi Arai, Jun Kawamura, Tomoko Uozumi, Yohei Usui, and Norimasa Okafuji


Key Findings

  1. Initial Movement (Tipping Phase):
    Both with and without attachments, teeth initially exhibit tipping and rotation.
    Example:
    Without attachment: θ1=0.30∘θ1​=0.30∘, displacement U=0.11 mmU=0.11mm.
    With attachment: Similar initial tipping (θ1=0.25∘θ1​=0.25∘, U=0.11 mmU=0.11mm).
    Conclusion: Attachments do not prevent initial tipping.

  2. Long-Term Movement (Bodily Movement):
    After sufficient time (e.g., 500 iterations), teeth with attachments achieve bodily movement (uprighting).
    Without attachments, tipping persists (θ1=0.25∘θ1​=0.25∘).
    Mechanism: Attachments increase the moment-to-force ratio, generating a counter-moment to upright the tooth.

  3. Stress Distribution (FEM Analysis):
    Equivalent stress (
    σeσe) in aligners differs with/without attachments (Figure 7).

Clinical Implications

  • Diastema Closure: Simulated for a 0.2 mm gap (typical aligner movement per stage: 0.2–0.25 mm).
    Target: Mesial translation by 0.1 mm per step.

  • Attachments are critical for long-term control but do not eliminate initial tipping.

References & Context

  • Yokoi et al. (2019) used Finite Element Method (FEM) to study attachment effects.

  • Figure 7: Shows stress distribution in aligners (higher stress with attachments).

Additional Notes

Summary

  • Without Attachments: Tipping dominates.

  • With Attachments: Initial tipping → Bodily movement over time.

  • Practical Tip: Allow sufficient time for attachments to facilitate uprighting.

bottom of page