[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The aim of this study was to evaluate the primary stability and the histomorphometric measurements of self-drilling and self-tapping orthodontic microimplants and the correlations between factors related to host, implant, and measuring technique.
Seventy-two self-drilling and self-tapping implants were placed into bovine iliac crest blocks after computed tomography assessments. Insertion torque values, subjective assessments of stability, and Periotest (Medizintecknik Gulden, Modautal, Germany) measurements were performed for each implant. Twelve specimens of each group were assigned to histologic and histomorphometric assessments.
The differences between insertion torque values, most Periotest values, and subjective assessments of stability scores were insignificant (P >0.05). The bone-implant contact percentage of the self-drilling group (87.60%) was higher than that of the self-tapping group (80.73%) (P <0.05). Positive correlations were found between insertion torque value, cortical bone thickness, and density in both groups (P <0.05). Negative correlations between insertion torque values and Periotest values were mostly observed in the self-drilling group (P <0.05). Positive correlations were found between bone-implant contact percentages, cortical bone densities, and insertion torque values in both groups (P <0.05). The differences between insertion torque values and corresponding subjective assessments of stability scores were different in both groups (P <0.05).
The differences in insertion torque values, Periotest values, and subjective assessments of stability scores of self-drilling and self-tapping implants were insignificant. Self-drilling implants had higher bone-implant contact percentages than did self-tapping implants. Significant correlations were found between parameters influencing the primary stability of the implants.
American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics: official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics 02/2012; 141(2):187-95. · 1.33 Impact Factor
[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The aim of this prospective clinical study was to evaluate the skeletal, dentoalveolar, and soft-tissue effects of maxillary protraction with miniplates compared with conventional facemask therapy and an untreated Class III control group.
Forty-five subjects who were in prepubertal or pubertal skeletal growth periods were included in the study and divided into 3 groups of 15 patients each. All subjects had skeletal and dental Class III malocclusions with maxillary deficiency, vertically normal growth pattern, anterior crossbite, Angle Class III molar relationship, normal or increased overbite, and retrusive nasomaxillary complex. Before maxillary protraction, rapid maxillary expansion with a bonded appliance was performed in both treatment groups. In the first group (MP+FM), consisting of 5 girls and 10 boys (mean age, 10.91 years), facemasks were applied from 2 titanium miniplates surgically placed laterally to the apertura piriformis regions of the maxilla. The second group (FM) of 7 girls and 8 boys (mean age, 10.31 years) received maxillary protraction therapy with conventional facemasks applied from hooks of the rapid maxillary expansion appliance. The third group of 8 girls and 7 boys (mean age, 10.05 years) was the untreated control group. Lateral cephalometric films were obtained at the beginning and end of treatment or observation in all groups and analyzed according to a structural superimposition method. Measurements were evaulated statistically with Wilcoxon and Kruskal-Wallis tests.
Treatment periods were 6.78 and 9.45 months in the MP+FM and FM groups, respectively, and the observation period in the control group was 7.59 months. The differences were significant between the 3 groups (P <0.05) and the MP+FM and FM groups (P <0.001). The maxilla moved forward for 2.3 mm in the MP+FM group and 1.83 mm in the FM group with maxillary protraction. The difference was significant between 2 groups (P <0.001). The protraction rates were 0.45 mm per month in the MP+FM group and 0.24 mm per month in the FM group (P <0.001). The maxilla showed anterior rotation after facemask therapy in the FM group (P <0.01); there was no significant rotation in the MP+FM group. Posterior rotation of the mandible and increased facial height were more evident in the FM group compared with the MP+FM group (P <0.01). Both the maxilla and the mandible moved forward significantly in the control group. Protrusion and mesialization of the maxillary teeth in the FM group were eliminated in the MP+FM group. The maxillomandibular relationships and the soft-tissue profile were improved remarkably in both treatment groups.
The undesired effects of conventional facemask therapy were reduced or eliminated with miniplate anchorage, and efficient maxillary protraction was achieved in a shorter treatment period.
American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics: official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics 05/2011; 139(5):636-49. · 1.33 Impact Factor
[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The aim of this prospective study was to compare the effects of incisor intrusion obtained with the aid of miniscrews and utility arches.
Twenty-four patients (10 male, 14 female) with a deepbite of at least 4 mm were divided to 2 groups. In group 1, 13 patients (3 male, 10 female; mean age, 20.90 ± 7.12 years) in the postpubertal growth period were treated by using miniscrews; in group 2, 11 patients (7 male, 4 female; mean age, 15.25 ± 3.93 years) were treated with utility arches. Lateral cephalometric headfilms were taken at the beginning of treatment and after intrusion for the evaluation of the treatment changes. Statistical analyses of the data were performed with a significance level of P <0.05.
Intrusion lasted 6.61 ± 2.95 months for group 1 and 6.61 ± 2.46 months for group 2. The changes in the center of resistance of the incisors were 1.75 ± 0.4 mm (P <0.05) for group 1 and 0.86 ± 0.5 mm (P >0.05) for group 2; the difference between the groups was significant (P <0.05). In the miniscrew group, the incisors were protruded 0.79 ± 1.4 mm (P >0.05) relative to pterygoid vertical and 3.85° ± 2.4° (P >0.05) relative to the palatal plane. In group 2, the incisors showed 3.91 ± 0.7 mm (P <0.05) of protrusion relative to pterygoid vertical and 13.55° ± 2.4° (P <0.05) relative to the palatal plane. The maxillary first molars showed significant distal tipping in group 2 (P <0.05).
Unlike with utility arches, true maxillary incisor intrusion can be achieved by application of intrusive forces close to the center of resistance by using miniscrews with no counteractive movements in the molars.
American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics: official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics 04/2011; 139(4):526-32. · 1.33 Impact Factor