One palatal implant for skeletal anchorage – frequency and range of indications

Abstract

ObjectiveAim of this investigation was to analyze the frequency and range of indications of orthodontic treatments using one palatal implant for skeletal anchorage, in a time frame of four years.Material and methodsA sample was comprised by viewing retrospectively the patient collective of a specialized university clinic who started orthodontic treatment in the time frame 01/09-12/12. Inclusion criterion was the first application of a superstructure within the investigated period after successful insertion of a palatal implant (Ortho-System®, Straumann, Basel, Switzerland). Frequency and range of indications of the conducted skeletally anchored tooth movement were determined by analyzing the individual patient documentation such as medical records, radiographs and casts.ResultsFrom a total of 1350 patients who started orthodontic treatment in this period met 56 (=4.2%) the inclusion criterion. In 85.7% of this sample was sagittal orthodontic tooth movement conducted, most frequently mesialization of ≥1 tooth (44.6%). Vertical tooth movement was in 57.1% of the sample performed, mostly extrusion of ≥1 tooth (34%). In 33.9% of the sample was ≥1 displaced tooth orthodontically relocated. One or two upper incisors were in 16.1% of the sample permanently replaced by the superstructure, all but one even after orthodontic treatment. In 66.1% of all cases were multi-functional anchorage challenges performed.Conclusion4.2 % of all treated patients within the investigated period required orthodontic treatment with skeletal anchorage (palatal implant), mainly for performing sagittal tooth movement (mesialization). The palatal implant was primarily used for multi-functional anchorage purposes, including skeletally anchored treatment in the mandible.

The Herbst appliance and its modifications - prevalence and individuality

“…If the indication is correct before the start of therapy, the patient can be spared an invasive, painful surgical procedure and additional costs [ 25 ]. On the other hand, there are numerous studies that use TADs as an anchoring tool for the mesialization of lower jaw molars and premolars to close spaces, for example [ 19 , 25 ].…”

The Herbst Appliance and its Modifications - Prevalence and Individuality

“…If the indication is correct before the start of therapy, the patient can be spared an invasive, painful surgical procedure and additional costs [25]. On the other hand, there are numerous studies that use TADs as an anchoring agent for the mesialization of lower jaw molars and premolars to close spaces, for example [19,25].…”

The Herbst appliance and its modifications - prevalence and individuality

“…If the indication is correct before the start of therapy, the patient can be spared an invasive, painful surgical procedure and additional costs [25]. On the other hand, there are numerous studies that use TADs as an anchoring tool for the mesialization of lower jaw molars and premolars to close spaces, for example [19,25].…”

“…Modi cations of the Herbst appliance faciliate the management of different treatment tasks and are non-invasive. This can, for example, avoid a surgical procedure if the indication is correct [13,18,19,20].…”