Literature DB >> 18984394

Bicortical vs monocortical orthodontic skeletal anchorage.

Bryan T Brettin1, Nicole M Grosland, Fang Qian, Karin A Southard, Tony D Stuntz, Teresa A Morgan, Steve D Marshall, Thomas E Southard.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Case reports have documented the use of titanium miniscrews in providing skeletal anchorage for orthodontic tooth movement. Success rates as low as 50% have been reported for screw retention in either the facial or the lingual cortical plates (monocortical placement). The purpose of this in-vitro study was to test the hypothesis that bicortical miniscrew placement (across the entire width of the alveolus) gives the orthodontist superior force resistance and stability (anchorage) compared with monocortical placement.
METHODS: Forty-four titanium alloy screws, 1.5 x 15.0 mm, were placed in 22 hemi-sected maxillae and mandibular specimens between the first and second premolars. Half were placed monocortically, half were placed bicortically, and all were subjected to tangential force loading perpendicular to the miniscrew through a lateral displacement of 1.5 mm. Bone samples were sectioned and bone thickness at the screw sites measured. Statistical analyses, consisting of paired samples t tests, 2-samples t tests, Spearman rank correlation tests, and Fisher exact tests, were used to compare monocortical with bicortical screw force-deflection characteristics and stability. Additionally, 2-dimensional plane-stress finite-element models of bicortical and monocortical screw placement subjected to similar loading were analyzed.
RESULTS: As hypothesized, deflection force values were significantly greater for bicortical screws than for monocortical screws placed in both the maxilla and the mandible (P <0.01 in each instance). Furthermore, force values at mandibular sites were significantly greater than those at maxillary sites for both types of screws. No significant differences in deflection force values were found between the right and left sides of the jaws, or between coronal and apical alveolar-process screw positions. A significant increasing relationship was found between mandibular buccal bone thickness and deflection force for monocortical screws only, and no relationship was found between maxillary bone thickness and deflection force for monocortical or bicortical screws. Monocortical screws were significantly more mobile after force application than bicortical screws. Finite-element analysis indicated lower cortical bone stresses with bicortical placement than with monocortical placement, and these results were consistent with in-vitro experimental findings.
CONCLUSIONS: Bicortical miniscrews provide the orthodontist superior anchorage resistance, reduced cortical bone stress, and superior stability compared with monocortical screws.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18984394     DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2007.01.031

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop        ISSN: 0889-5406            Impact factor:   2.650


  16 in total

1.  Primary migration of a mini-implant under a functional orthodontic loading.

Authors:  Joseph W Pittman; Anand Navalgund; Steve H Byun; Hechang Huang; Albert H Kim; Do-Gyoon Kim
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2013-07-17       Impact factor: 3.573

2.  Radiological evaluation of the bone and soft tissue thicknesses of the palate for using a miniscrew-supported maxillary skeletal expander.

Authors:  Sun-Kyoung Yu; Yonghwa Cho; Yo-Seob Seo; Jae-Sung Kim; Do Kyung Kim; Heung-Joong Kim
Journal:  Surg Radiol Anat       Date:  2021-01-02       Impact factor: 1.246

3.  Direct versus indirect loading of orthodontic miniscrew implants-an FEM analysis.

Authors:  C Holberg; P Winterhalder; N Holberg; I Rudzki-Janson; A Wichelhaus
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2012-10-31       Impact factor: 3.573

4.  Effects of monocortical and bicortical mini-implant anchorage on bone-borne palatal expansion using finite element analysis.

Authors:  Robert J Lee; Won Moon; Christine Hong
Journal:  Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop       Date:  2017-05       Impact factor: 2.650

5.  Analysis of biological and structural factors implicated in the clinical success of orthodontic miniscrews at posterior maxillary interradicular sites.

Authors:  M Palone; A Darsiè; G B Maino; G Siciliani; G A Spedicato; L Lombardo
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2021-11-27       Impact factor: 3.573

6.  An evaluation of insertion sites for mini-implants: a micro - CT study of human autopsy material.

Authors:  Morten G Laursen; Birte Melsen; Paolo M Cattaneo
Journal:  Angle Orthod       Date:  2012-08-27       Impact factor: 2.079

7.  Factors affecting stresses in cortical bone around miniscrew implants: a three-dimensional finite element study.

Authors:  Ramzi Duaibis; Budi Kusnoto; Raghu Natarajan; Linping Zhao; Carla Evans
Journal:  Angle Orthod       Date:  2012-03-05       Impact factor: 2.079

8.  Effect of vertical placement angle on the insertion torque of mini-implants in human alveolar bone.

Authors:  Rafael Ribeiro Maya; Célia Regina Maio Pinzan-Vercelino; Julio de Araujo Gurgel
Journal:  Dental Press J Orthod       Date:  2016 Sep-Oct

9.  Cone-Beam Computed Tomographic Assessment of Bone Thickness in the Mandibular Anterior Region for Application of Orthodontic Mini-Screws.

Authors:  Majid Shalchi; Zahra Dalili Kajan; Mohammad Shabani; Negar Khosravifard; Samar Khabbaz; Farnoosh Khaksari
Journal:  Turk J Orthod       Date:  2021-06

Review 10.  Systematic review of mini-implant displacement under orthodontic loading.

Authors:  Manuel Nienkemper; Jörg Handschel; Dieter Drescher
Journal:  Int J Oral Sci       Date:  2013-12-20       Impact factor: 6.344

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.