Nonextraction treatment with temporary skeletal anchorage devices to correct a Class II Division 2 malocclusion with excessive gingival display

Nishimura, Makoto; Sannohe, Minayo; Nagasaka, Hiroshi; Igarashi, Kaoru; Sugawara, Junji

doi:10.1016/j.ajodo.2012.06.022

Cited by 44 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Within this context, the bonding of orthodontic accessories to miniplates can facilitate treatment by providing new possibilities of orthodontic movement while avoiding further surgical interventions for miniplate repositioning. The mechanical test conducted in this study corroborates current clinical practice, in which orthodontic accessories are commonly bonded to miniplates as a means of assisting treatment planning [9] and providing additional opportunities for orthodontic mechanics to meet the needs of each case.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 72%

“…Several varieties of miniplates are available on the market. The miniplate head (i.e., the portion that remains exposed within the oral cavity) is available in several shapes, including circular [4], hook [9,13] and tube [6,17,18]. Although there have been no previous studies on the bonding of orthodontic accessories to miniplates, it has been observed that such attachment is possible regardless of miniplate shape.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, this does not solve the problem of occasionally having to move the point of anchorage, and practitioners are still limited to using the systems made by the miniplate manufacturer. Bonding of orthodontic devices to anchorage miniplates can provide additional torque for dental intrusion, facilitate treatment, and shorten orthodontic appliance wear time [9,11].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Debonding Shear Strength of Orthodontic Tubes Bonded to Skeletal Anchorage Miniplates with Different Agents

Meirelles¹,

Haas²,

Scolari³

et al. 2019

TODENTJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction:Most miniplates used for skeletal anchorage lack built-in orthodontic devices. To address this issue, orthodontists must use creative solutions, such as bonding buttons, brackets, or tubes directly to the miniplates, thus making them more versatile devices that provide a wider range of tooth movement possibilities. The purpose of the present study was to ascertain the debonding strength in Megapascals (MPa) of orthodontic accessories bonded to skeletal anchorage miniplates with different bonding agents. Methods:Forty specimens were divided into two equal groups by bonding agent: Group 1, resin (Transbond XT ® , 3M ESPE); Group 2, cyanoacrylate (Scotchbond ® , 3M ESPE). Shear strength testing was performed in an EMIC DL-2000 universal testing machine. Results:The results obtained were 2.28 ± 0.44 MPa for Group 1 and 4.90 ± 0.76 MPa for Group 2. The Kolmogorov-Smirnov test was used to assess the normality of data distribution. Student's t-test was used to compare means in the response variable. Conclusion:A statistically significant difference was observed between groups. However, both bonding agents provided strength in excess of that needed for secure orthodontic tooth movement.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 72%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Debonding Shear Strength of Orthodontic Tubes Bonded to Skeletal Anchorage Miniplates with Different Agents

Meirelles¹,

Haas²,

Scolari³

et al. 2019

TODENTJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Maxillary molar distalization with skeletal anchorage is an efficient and noncompliance-dependent treatment modality for patients with a Class II molar relationship 123. However, orthodontists are occasionally in challenging situation dealing with skeletal anchorage devices.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Immediate changes in the mandibular dentition after maxillary molar distalization using headgear

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this study was to investigate immediate changes in the mandibular dentition after maxillary molar distalization using headgear in non-growing patients. Sixteen patients (mean age, 18.9 ± 2.0 years) with Class II molar relationship and crowding were included in the present study. To correct the molar relationship, headgear was used for maxillary molar distalization. Cone-beam computed tomography-generated half-cephalograms (CG Cephs) and dental casts were used to evaluate dental changes for each subject before and immediately after molar distalization using headgear. The mean duration that subjects wore the headgear was 6.3 months. CG Cephs showed that the first maxillary molars were distalized 4.2 ± 1.6 mm with 9.7° ± 6.1° of distal angulation. The intercanine, interpremolar, and intermolar widths of the mandible increased after maxillary molar distalization. The present study's results suggest that maxillary molar distalization using headgear induces a spontaneous response in the untreated mandibular dentition of non-growing patients.

show abstract

“…This type of anchorage has also been indicated in adult patients who would normally decline extraoral appliances, as well as in those having a complete dentition lacking edentulous gaps. [1][2][3][4] Miniimplants are relatively easy to insert and remove at a relatively low cost, with no need to wait lengthy periods between installation and force application. 5,6 Many types of anchorage, including conventional osseointegrated implants, nonosseointegrated appliances, miniplates, and mini-implants have been proposed.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

In vitro study of human osteoblast proliferation and morphology on orthodontic mini-implants

Bueno

Basting

2015

The Angle Orthodontist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Nonextraction treatment with temporary skeletal anchorage devices to correct a Class II Division 2 malocclusion with excessive gingival display

Cited by 44 publications

References 15 publications

Debonding Shear Strength of Orthodontic Tubes Bonded to Skeletal Anchorage Miniplates with Different Agents

Debonding Shear Strength of Orthodontic Tubes Bonded to Skeletal Anchorage Miniplates with Different Agents

Immediate changes in the mandibular dentition after maxillary molar distalization using headgear

In vitro study of human osteoblast proliferation and morphology on orthodontic mini-implants

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About