A study of orthodontic anchorage possibilities in basal bone

Gainsforth, B.L; Higley, L.B.

doi:10.1016/0096-6347(45)90025-1

Cited by 139 publications

(79 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Since researchers introduced vitallium screws in dogs and human patients as skeletal anchors, [1][2][3] orthodontic mini-implants for anchorage are now widely used. Currently, titanium is typically used for orthodontic mini-implants.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Resistance to Immediate Orthodontic Loading of Surface-Treated Mini-Implants

Mo¹,

Kim²,

Kook³

et al. 2010

The Angle Orthodontist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To test the hypothesis that there is no difference in the stability and resistance to orthodontic forces of immediately loaded sandblasted and acid-etched (SAE) mini-implants and those of machined-surface implants of the same size and shape. Materials and Methods: Two types of mini-implants were used in the tibiae of 44 rabbits; some had an SAE surface and some had machined surfaces. Orthodontic loading of 150 g was applied immediately after placement. The success rates and maximum removal torque values (RTVs) of 412 mini-implants were recorded and compared immediately after placement, 3 days after placement, and 1, 6, and 10 weeks after placement. The RTV data were analyzed using multiple regression analysis to evaluate differences with respect to surface treatment, loading, and loading periods (P , .05). Multiple comparisons using the Scheffé method were performed to evaluate the RTVs for the subsequent loading periods. Results: Thirteen mini-implants failed during the experimental period. The SAE group had a higher RTV than the machined group, and there was significant difference in RTVs in accordance with loading periods (P , .001). However, there was no significant RTV difference between loaded and unloaded mini-implants. Conclusions: The hypothesis was supported. Both SAE mini-implants and machined miniimplants can be loaded immediately and experience similar success rates. RTVs were higher for the SAE mini-implants than for the machined mini-implants. The latter finding suggests that, for immediate loading, SAE mini-implants may provide more stable retention than machined miniimplants. (Angle Orthod 2010;80:123-129.)

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Resistance to Immediate Orthodontic Loading of Surface-Treated Mini-Implants

Mo¹,

Kim²,

Kook³

et al. 2010

The Angle Orthodontist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the cases presented, a significant amount of molar intrusion was achieved, and this was associated with minimum Background/historical review Vitallium screws were used by Gainsforth and Higley, as early as 1945, to apply orthodontic forces in dogs, although unsuccessfully. 8 In 1983 Creekmore described using a metal screw to intrude anterior teeth, and the possibility of skeletal anchorage. 9 Roberts et al used springs to apply force to titanium screws in rabbits in 1984, and concluded the implants provided adequate anchorage for orthodontic force levels.…”

Section: Types Of Implant Anchorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The role of orthodontics in implant dentistry

2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The idea of using screws fixed to bone to obtain absolute anchorage goes back to 1945, when Gainsforth and Higley (Gainsforth & Higley, 1945) placed Vitallium screws in the ascending ramus of six dogs to retract their canines. The first clinical use reported in the literature came in 1983, when Creekmore and Eklund (Creekmore & Eklund,1983) used a Vitallium bone screw inserted in the anterior nasal spine to treat a patient with a deep overbite.…”

Section: Skeletal Anchoragementioning

confidence: 99%