Literature DB >> 21303419

Assessment of mini-implant displacement using cone beam computed tomography.

Matheus Alves1, Carolina Baratieri1, Lincoln Issamu Nojima1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To assess, through cone beam computed tomography (CBCT), the mini-implants' stability and behaviour when submitted to orthodontic force during upper molars' intrusion.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Forty-one mini-implants were divided into two groups: 30 in the buccal and palatal mini-implants group (BPMI), inserted into buccal and palatal sides, and 11 in the midpalatal mini-implants group (MPMI), inserted into midpalatal suture. One day after insertion, a 200 gf was applied on the mini-implants during a 5-month period. CBCT was performed twice: before force application (CBCT 1) and 5 months later (CBCT 2). For mini-implant displacement assessment, the distance of mini-implants' head (HMI) and tail (TMI) to coronal, sagittal and axial planes was measured at CBCT 1 and 2.
RESULTS: For the BPMI group, the displacement rate was statistically significant (P<0.05) in all three dimensions for both the head and the tail. For the MPMI group, the displacement rate was statistically significant (P<0.05) only in the antero-posterior (head and tail) and vertical (head) dimensions.
CONCLUSIONS: Buccal, palatal and midpalatal mini-implants showed some displacement (mean value ≤0.78) when submitted to force, although they are aimed to provide stable skeletal anchorage.
© 2011 John Wiley & Sons A/S.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21303419     DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2010.02092.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Oral Implants Res        ISSN: 0905-7161            Impact factor:   5.977


  9 in total

1.  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

2.  Indirect miniscrew anchorage: biomechanical loading of the dental anchorage during mandibular molar protraction-an FEM analysis.

Authors:  Christof Holberg; Philipp Winterhalder; Nikola Holberg; Andrea Wichelhaus; Ingrid Rudzki-Janson
Journal:  J Orofac Orthop       Date:  2014-01-23       Impact factor: 1.938

3.  Stability of smooth and rough mini-implants: clinical and biomechanical evaluation - an in vivostudy.

Authors:  Giselle Naback Lemes Vilani; Antônio Carlos de Oliveira Ruellas; Carlos Nelson Elias; Cláudia Trindade Mattos
Journal:  Dental Press J Orthod       Date:  2015-10

Review 4.  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

Review 5.  Cone-Beam Computed Tomography in Orthodontics.

Authors:  Ahmad Abdelkarim
Journal:  Dent J (Basel)       Date:  2019-09-02

6.  Orthodontic implants: concepts for the orthodontic practitioner.

Authors:  Carlos Nelson Elias; Antônio Carlos de Oliveira Ruellas; Daniel Jogaib Fernandes
Journal:  Int J Dent       Date:  2012-11-11

7.  Changes consequent to maxillary molar distalization with the bone-anchored pendulum appliance.

Authors:  Aldo Otazú Cambiano; Guilherme Janson; Acácio Fuziy; Daniela Gamba Garib; Diego Coelho Lorenzoni
Journal:  J Orthod Sci       Date:  2017 Oct-Dec

8.  Additional intraoral radiographs may change the judgment regarding the final position of orthodontic mini-implants.

Authors:  Marina K Oba; Guido A Marañón-Vásquez; Fábio L Romano; Christiano Oliveira-Santos
Journal:  Dental Press J Orthod       Date:  2018 Mar-Apr

9.  Bone remodelling patterns around orthodontic mini-implants migrating in bone: an experimental study in rat vertebrae.

Authors:  Kathrin Becker; Nicole Rauch; Giulia Brunello; Sarah Azimi; Mathias Beller; Mira Hüfner; Manuel Nienkemper; Beryl Schwarz-Herzke; Dieter Drescher
Journal:  Eur J Orthod       Date:  2021-12-01       Impact factor: 3.075

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.