Three-Dimensional Finite Element Comparison of Ballista Spring and Elastic Thread Systems in the Traction of Impacted Maxillary Canines: Implications for Anchorage Control

Objectives: This study aimed to compare the biomechanical effects of Ballista Spring and Elastic Thread systems on impacted maxillary canines using three-dimensional finite element analysis (FEA). Materials and Methods: Finite element models were constructed from CBCT images of a human maxilla, incorporating cortical bone, spongy bone, teeth, and periodontal ligament. Two orthodontic force application methods were simulated: Ballista Spring (0.016-inch stainless steel) and Elastic Thread (0.25 mm medical-grade latex). Both systems delivered a force of 150 g to the impacted canine. Stress distribution and initial displacement patterns were analyzed using ANSYS Workbench. Results: The Ballista Spring generated a more uniform stress distribution across the periodontal ligament and cortical bone, with a maximum von Mises stress of 0.0042 MPa. The impacted canine exhibited an initial displacement of 0.015 μm, primarily in the vertical and distal directions, indicating a controlled movement path. In contrast, the Elastic Thread showed a more concentrated stress pattern with a maximum von Mises stress of 0.0035 MPa, and the impacted canine experienced 0.013 μm of displacement, accompanied by greater lateral deviation and buccal tipping of the adjacent teeth. The Ballista Spring induced higher stress levels on anchorage teeth—particularly the first molars and premolars—while the Elastic Thread exerted more localized stress around the impacted canine and adjacent structures. All observed stress values remained within physiological thresholds, indicating no immediate risk of tissue damage. Conclusions: Both systems were effective in facilitating the eruption of the impacted canines. However, the Ballista Spring provided more favorable stress distribution and controlled displacement, making it suitable for complex cases requiring anchorage preservation. The Elastic Thread, while less biomechanically efficient, remained a practical and cost-effective alternative in patients with adequate periodontal support.