A prospective study of factors associated with orthodontic mini-implant survival

Tsai, Chia‐Chun; Chang, Hong-Po; Pan, Chin-Yun; Chou, Szu-Ting; Tseng, Yu-Chuan

doi:10.2334/josnusd.16-0145

Cited by 14 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In their study, Tsai et al. stated that “the exponent of the coefficient for age indicates that a 20‐year increase in age is associated with a 2.66‐fold increase in the risk of TADs failure” . This finding was not in accordance with other studies, which found that there was no significant differences between adolescents and adults.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 81%

Success rates and factors associated with failure of temporary anchorage devices: A prospective clinical trial

Aly

Alyan

Fayed

et al. 2018

J of Invest & Clin Dent

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 81%

Success rates and factors associated with failure of temporary anchorage devices: A prospective clinical trial

Aly

Alyan

Fayed

et al. 2018

J of Invest & Clin Dent

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In most of the studies mean patient age was around 25 years, samples generally consisting of predominantly young adults. Of the 26 articles, 7 were prospective studies [15][16][17][18][19][20][21] and 19 retrospective [11][12][13][14][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35][36] . Follow-up periods ranged from approximately 18 months to 2 years.…”

Section: Results Of Individual Studies Meta-analysis and Additional mentioning

confidence: 99%

Risk factors for orthodontic mini-implants in skeletal anchorage biological stability: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis

Casaña-Ruiz

Bellot-Arcís

Paredes-Gallardo

et al. 2020

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Montiel-company the reason of the biological stability loss of mini-implants is still a matter of discussion between dentistry professionals. the main objective of this systematic literature review and meta-analysis was to analyze the risk factors that prejudice this loss. A search was made in the electronic databases pubmed, Scopus, embase and cochrane, in addition a manual search was made too in Grey Literature (opengrey). no limits were set on the year of publication or language. the inclusion criteria were: studies in humans treated with fixed appliances with mini-implants, where the risk factors for secondary stability were evaluated for a minimum of 8 weeks. After eliminating duplicate studies and assessing which ones achieve the inclusion criteria, a total of 26 studies were selected for the qualitative synthesis, 18 of them were included in the quantitative synthesis. Common risk variables were compared in all of them. Analyzing the forest and funnel plots, statistically significant differences were obtained only for location, the upper maxilla having lower risk than the mandible with an odds ratio of 0.56 and confidence interval of 0.39 to 0.80. Prospective studies under controlled conditions should be required in order to obtain a correct assessment of the variables analyzed. The use of mini-implants to provide anchorage for force application has simplified and improved the efficacy of many orthodontic treatments, reducing unwanted movements of other teeth, especially in adult patients. For this reason, anchorage in bone is becoming a much more widely used technique 1. Mini-implants are made of titanium or stainless steel, their structure has three different parts: the top one (supra-gingival, which allows the anchor), the medium area or neck, and the thread, which is inserted inside the bone and provides mechanic anchor. Moreover, the most common types of mini-implants are: Mini Implant System (dbOrthodontics), Vector Temporary Anchorage System (Omco) and the Abso Anchor System (Dentos). All of them are available in different lengths (6-12 mm) and diameters (1-2 mm) 2. Mini-implants or TADs (Temporary Anchorage Devices) 2 have been used mainly as an auxiliary fixing method but more recently have been adopted for additional functions such as: mid-line or inclined plane alignment, space opening, or molar intrusion or extrusion 3. The increasing use of mini-implants is justified by its multiple advantages, the simplicity of the surgical technique, and low cost. Moreover, it is well accepted by patients and achieves success rates of 80-90% 4. While failure may be avoided by establishing the right therapeutic protocols, the fact that a percentage of mini-implants fail should not be overlooked. Stability refers to the resistance to reactive forces, offered by teeth or other oral or extraoral structures, that would lead to unwanted movements 5. In the case of mini-implants, two types of stability can be distinguished: primary and secondary. Primary stability is mechanical and is achieved by the mini-implant c...

show abstract

“…In another study, titanium MIs were self-drilling, whereas the SS MIs were predrilled 15 In a third study, 3 three groups were used, one composed of self-drilling SS MIs, another composed of self-drilling titanium MIs, and a third composed of predrilled titanium MIs. The greatest follow-up period was 12 months, 14,20 and the lowest was 160.8 days. 15 Only one study did not report the follow-up period.…”

Section: Study Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 94%

“…Selected articles were published between 2009 and 2019. Five studies were CCTs, four 3,14,15,20 were prospective and one 21 retrospective. All CCTs investigated interradicular MIs.…”

Section: Study Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Regarding the CCTs, two 15,20 showed moderate RoB as a result of the differences in treatment between groups and the selection of results presented, whereas the other three articles presented a high RoB. 3,14,21 One 21 of those was a retrospective study in which important information was lacking such as the force applied, follow-up period, installation purpose, and eligibility criteria.…”

Section: Rob Within Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Stainless steel or titanium mini-implants?

Mecenas¹,

Espinosa²,

Cardoso³

et al. 2020

The Angle Orthodontist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives To investigate whether there was a difference in success rates when stainless steel (SS) was compared to titanium mini-implants (MIs) in orthodontic patients. Materials and Methods PubMed, Cochrane, Scopus, Web of Science, Lilacs, Google Scholar, Clinical Trials, and OpenGray were searched without restrictions. A manual search was also performed in the references of the included articles. Studies comparing the success rate between SS and titanium MIs were included. Risk of bias (RoB) was assessed using the ROBINS-I (Risk of Bias in Non-randomized Studies-of Interventions) Tool or RoB 2.0 according to the study design. The level of evidence was assessed through GRADE (Grading of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation). Results Six studies met the eligibility criteria. One study was a randomized clinical trial that evaluated extraalveolar MIs, and nonrandomized trials examined interradicular MIs. The RCT presented a low RoB, two nonrandomized trials presented a moderate risk, and three presented a high risk. The quality of the evidence was high for the randomized clinical trial and moderate for the nonrandomized trials. Most studies found no difference between materials, with good success rates for both (SS, 74.6%–100%; titanium: 80.9%–100%) and only one study, with a high RoB, showed a higher success rate with titanium MIs (90%) when compared with SS (50%). A quantitative analysis was not because of the great heterogeneity among the studies. Conclusions Although limited, the current evidence seems to show that the material used is not a major factor in the success rate of MIs. Because it has a lower cost than titanium and presents similar clinical efficiency, SS is a great material for orthodontic MIs.

show abstract

A prospective study of factors associated with orthodontic mini-implant survival

Abstract: The orthodontic mini-implant (MI) is

Cited by 14 publications

References 16 publications

Success rates and factors associated with failure of temporary anchorage devices: A prospective clinical trial

Success rates and factors associated with failure of temporary anchorage devices: A prospective clinical trial

Risk factors for orthodontic mini-implants in skeletal anchorage biological stability: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis

Stainless steel or titanium mini-implants?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About