Francesca Thaden
Current Organizations / Institutes
The organizations/institutes from the scholar's latest article
Research Subjects
Francesca Thaden has a total of 4 co-authors. Here are the top co-authors by number of shared publications:
- Andrea Wichelhaus
Department of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Goethestrasse 70, 80366 Munich, Germany
2 shared publications - Hisham Sabbagh
Department of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Goethestrasse 70, 80336 Munich, Germany
2 shared publications - Linus Hötzel
Department of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, LMU University Hospital, LMU Munich, Goethestraße 70, 80336 Munich, Germany
2 shared publications - Matthias Mertmann
Department of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, LMU University Hospital, LMU Munich, Goethestraße 70, 80336 Munich, Germany
2 shared publications
Latest Publications
- Open Access
In Vitro Investigation Using a New Biomechanical Force–Torque Analysis System: Comparison of Conventional and CAD/CAM-Fixed Orthodontic Retainers
(1) Background: After more than a decade since their first description, Inadvertent Tooth Movements (ITMs) remain an adverse effect of orthodontic retainers without a clear etiology. To further investigate the link between ITMs and the mechanical properties of different retainers, the response upon vertical loading was compared in three retainer types (two stainless steel and one nickel–titanium). The influence of different reference teeth was also considered. (2) Methods: Three retainers (R1, R2, R3) were tested in a newly developed biomechanical analysis system (FRANS). They were bonded to 3D-printed models of the lower anterior jaw and vertically displaced up to 0.3 mm. Developing forces and moments were recorded at the center of force. (3) Results: The vertical displacement caused vertical forces (Fz) and labiolingual moments (My) to arise. These were highest in the lateral incisors (up to 2.35 ± 0.59 N and 9.27 ± 5.86 Nmm for R1; 1.69 ± 1.06 N and 7.42 ± 2.65 Nmm for R2; 3.28 ± 1.73 N and 15.91 ± 9.71 Nmm for R3) for all analyzed retainers and with the R3 retainer for all analyzed reference teeth, while the lowest Fz and My values were recorded with the R1 retainer. (4) Conclusions: Displacements of 0.2 mm and larger provided forces and moments which could be sufficient to cause unwanted torque movements, such as ITMs, in all analyzed retainers. Clinicians must be mindful of these risks and perform post-treatment checkups on patients with retainers of all materials.
Open AccessIn Vitro Investigation Using a New Biomechanical Force–Torque Analysis System: Comparison of Conventional and CAD/CAM-Fixed Orthodontic Retainers
(1) Background: After more than a decade since their first description, Inadvertent Tooth Movements (ITMs) remain an adverse effect of orthodontic retainers without a clear etiology. To further investigate the link between ITMs and the mechanical properties of different retainers, the response upon vertical loading was compared in three retainer types (two stainless steel and one nickel–titanium). The influence of different reference teeth was also considered. (2) Methods: Three retainers (R1, R2, R3) were tested in a newly developed biomechanical analysis system (FRANS). They were bonded to 3D-printed models of the lower anterior jaw and vertically displaced up to 0.3 mm. Developing forces and moments were recorded at the center of force. (3) Results: The vertical displacement caused vertical forces (Fz) and labiolingual moments (My) to arise. These were highest in the lateral incisors (up to 2.35 ± 0.59 N and 9.27 ± 5.86 Nmm for R1; 1.69 ± 1.06 N and 7.42 ± 2.65 Nmm for R2; 3.28 ± 1.73 N and 15.91 ± 9.71 Nmm for R3) for all analyzed retainers and with the R3 retainer for all analyzed reference teeth, while the lowest Fz and My values were recorded with the R1 retainer. (4) Conclusions: Displacements of 0.2 mm and larger provided forces and moments which could be sufficient to cause unwanted torque movements, such as ITMs, in all analyzed retainers. Clinicians must be mindful of these risks and perform post-treatment checkups on patients with retainers of all materials.
- Open Access
- 11 September 2024
- Published by MDPI AG in Preprints.org
In Vitro Investigation Using a New Biomechanical Force-Torque Analysis System: Comparison of Conventional and CAD/CAM Fixed Orthodontic Retainers
(1) Background: To further investigate the link between inadvertent tooth movements (ITMs) and mechanical properties of different retainers, the response upon vertical loading was compared in three different retainers (two stainless steel and one nickel-titanium). The influence of different reference teeth was also considered. (2) Methods: Three retainers (R1, R2, R3) were tested in a newly developed biomechanical analysis system (FRANS). They were bonded to 3D-printed models of the lower anterior jaw and vertically displaced up to 0.3mm. Developing forces and moments were recorded at the center of force. (3) Results: The vertical displacement caused vertical forces (Fz) and labiolingual moments (My) to arise. These were highest in the lateral incisors (up to 2.35±0.59N and 9.27±5.86Nmm for R1; 1.69±1.06N and 7.42±2.65Nmm for R2; 3.28±1.73N and 15.91±9.71Nmm for R3) for all analyzed retainers, and with the R3 retainer for all analyzed reference teeth, while the lowest Fz and My values were recorded with the R1 retainer. (4) Conclusions: Displacements of 0.2mm and larger provided forces and moments which could be sufficient to cause unwanted torque movements, such as ITMs in all analyzed retainers. Clinicians must be mindful of these risks and perform posttreatment checkups on patients with retainers of all materials.
- 11 September 2024
- Published by MDPI AG in Preprints.org
Open AccessIn Vitro Investigation Using a New Biomechanical Force-Torque Analysis System: Comparison of Conventional and CAD/CAM Fixed Orthodontic Retainers
(1) Background: To further investigate the link between inadvertent tooth movements (ITMs) and mechanical properties of different retainers, the response upon vertical loading was compared in three different retainers (two stainless steel and one nickel-titanium). The influence of different reference teeth was also considered. (2) Methods: Three retainers (R1, R2, R3) were tested in a newly developed biomechanical analysis system (FRANS). They were bonded to 3D-printed models of the lower anterior jaw and vertically displaced up to 0.3mm. Developing forces and moments were recorded at the center of force. (3) Results: The vertical displacement caused vertical forces (Fz) and labiolingual moments (My) to arise. These were highest in the lateral incisors (up to 2.35±0.59N and 9.27±5.86Nmm for R1; 1.69±1.06N and 7.42±2.65Nmm for R2; 3.28±1.73N and 15.91±9.71Nmm for R3) for all analyzed retainers, and with the R3 retainer for all analyzed reference teeth, while the lowest Fz and My values were recorded with the R1 retainer. (4) Conclusions: Displacements of 0.2mm and larger provided forces and moments which could be sufficient to cause unwanted torque movements, such as ITMs in all analyzed retainers. Clinicians must be mindful of these risks and perform posttreatment checkups on patients with retainers of all materials.