scholarly journals Mini-implants, mega solutions: a review

2021 ◽  
Vol 03 (03) ◽  
pp. 96-99
Author(s):  
Alaveni Manga Narsingoju ◽  
C. Ravi Kumar ◽  
Harilal G ◽  
Pavani Lukka
Keyword(s):  
Mini Implants

Effect of Different Cleaning and Sterilization Methods on the Surface Morphology of Mini-implants

2017 ◽  
Vol 68 (9) ◽  
pp. 1974-1977
Author(s):  
Silvia Izabella Pop ◽  
Dana Cristina Bratu ◽  
Violeta Valentina Merie ◽  
Mariana Pacurar ◽  
Catalin Petru Simon ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Surface Morphology ◽  
Surface Topography ◽  
Distilled Water ◽  
Mini Implants ◽  
Cleaning Methods ◽  
Sem Analyses

The objective of this study was to analyse morphological and surface topography variations of two types of mini-implants after using different chemical and physical cleaning methods and autoclaved sterilization. One hundred mini-implants from two different manufacturers were used in this study. The mini-implants from each manufacturer were divided in five groups, each consisting of ten samples: G0 new, unused, G1 ultrasonically cleaned, G2 chemically cleaned, G3 sandblasted, G4 cleaned with distilled water. SEM analyses of the mini-implants were performed. Only procedures used in samples from group G2 and G3 removed the tissue remains from the mini-implants surface.

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

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
María Dolores Casaña-Ruiz ◽  
Carlos Bellot-Arcís ◽  
Vanessa Paredes-Gallardo ◽  
Verónica García-Sanz ◽  
José Manuel Almerich-Silla ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Literature Review ◽  
Systematic Literature Review ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Skeletal Anchorage ◽  
Biological Stability ◽  
Mini Implants

scholarly journals Experimental & FEM Analysis of Orthodontic Mini-Implant Design on Primary Stability

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (12) ◽  
pp. 5461
Author(s):  
Elmedin Mešić ◽  
Enis Muratović ◽  
Lejla Redžepagić-Vražalica ◽  
Nedim Pervan ◽  
Adis J. Muminović ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Finite Element ◽  
Three Dimensional ◽  
Primary Stability ◽  
Fem Analysis ◽  
Implant Design ◽  
Special Focus ◽  
Engineering System ◽  
Mini Implants ◽  
Pull Out ◽  
Computer Aided

The main objective of this research is to establish a connection between orthodontic mini-implant design, pull-out force and primary stability by comparing two commercial mini-implants or temporary anchorage devices, Tomas®-pin and Perfect Anchor. Mini-implant geometric analysis and quantification of bone characteristics are performed, whereupon experimental in vitro pull-out test is conducted. With the use of the CATIA (Computer Aided Three-dimensional Interactive Application) CAD (Computer Aided Design)/CAM (Computer Aided Manufacturing)/CAE (Computer Aided Engineering) system, 3D (Three-dimensional) geometric models of mini-implants and bone segments are created. Afterwards, those same models are imported into Abaqus software, where finite element models are generated with a special focus on material properties, boundary conditions and interactions. FEM (Finite Element Method) analysis is used to simulate the pull-out test. Then, the results of the structural analysis are compared with the experimental results. The FEM analysis results contain information about maximum stresses on implant–bone system caused due to the pull-out force. It is determined that the core diameter of a screw thread and conicity are the main factors of the mini-implant design that have a direct impact on primary stability. Additionally, stresses generated on the Tomas®-pin model are lower than stresses on Perfect Anchor, even though Tomas®-pin endures greater pull-out forces, the implant system with implemented Tomas®-pin still represents a more stressed system due to the uniform distribution of stresses with bigger values.

Microflora associated with successful and failed orthodontic mini-implants

2009 ◽  
Vol 20 (11) ◽  
pp. 1186-1190 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephanie Apel ◽  
Christian Apel ◽  
Camillo Morea ◽  
André Tortamano ◽  
Gladys Cristina Dominguez ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mini Implants

Expectations, acceptance and preferences of patients in treatment with orthodontic mini-implants

2011 ◽  
Vol 72 (3) ◽  
pp. 214-222 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Lehnen ◽  
F. McDonald ◽  
C. Bourauel ◽  
A. Jäger ◽  
M. Baxmann
Keyword(s):  
Mini Implants

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

2015 ◽  
Vol 85 (6) ◽  
pp. 920-926 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ricardo Carvalho Bueno ◽  
Roberta Tarkany Basting
Keyword(s):  
Chemical Composition ◽  
In Vitro Study ◽  
Chemical Components ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Osteoblast Proliferation ◽  
Mini Implants ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Implant Anchorage ◽  
Positive Effect

ABSTRACT Objective:  To evaluate the proliferation and morphology of human osteoblasts cultured on two brands of mini-implants after 24, 48, and 72 hours, in addition to the chemical composition found on their surface. Materials and Methods:  Two brands of mini-implant (Morelli and Neodent) were evaluated; polystyrene was used as a control group (n  =  3). Osteoblasts were cultured on the surface of sterilized mini-implants in a CO2 incubator at different time periods (24, 48, and 72 hours). Osteoblast proliferation was quantified by scanning electron microscopy using up to 5000× magnification, and cell morphology was analyzed by a single observer. For the chemical analysis, spectroscopy X-ray fluorescence was used to identify and quantify chemical components on the surface of the mini-implants. Results:  Two-way ANOVA showed no significant interaction between the factors studied (P  =  0.686). A Tukey test revealed no significant difference in osteoblast proliferation between the mini-implants at all studied periods; however, a difference in cell proliferation was detected between the Neodent and the control group (P  =  .025). For all groups, time had a direct and positive effect on osteoblast proliferation (P < .001). The significant elements present in both brands of mini-implants were titanium, aluminum, vanadium, and iron. Conclusions:  Osteoblast proliferation was present on the mini-implants studied, which increased over time; however, no significant difference between brands was observed. No difference was seen between the mini-implants evaluated in terms of chemical composition. Cell adhesion after 72 hours suggests that areas of bone remodeling can be achieved, thus initiating the process of mini-implant anchorage.

Utilisation raisonnée des mini-implants d’ancrage dans la correction des classes II subdivisions pour une approche globale

2021 ◽  
Vol 55 (2) ◽  
pp. 223-259
Author(s):  
Caroline Cazenave
Keyword(s):  
Cone Beam ◽  
Mini Implants ◽  
Approche Globale

La classe II subdivision est une malocclusion complexe d’origine multifactorielle, beaucoup mieux définie depuis quelques années avec l’imagerie 3D. Moins de la moitié des classes II subdivision prend son origine dans une déviation d’une des deux arcades, maxillaire ou mandibulaire, le restant mettant en jeu des mécanismes de mise en place fonctionnels beaucoup plus complexes. Les mécaniques de distalisation sur ancrage squelettique ont apporté une réponse évidente aux besoins de symétrisation des arcades. Mais les mini-implants d’ancrage ont également largement démontré leur intérêt dans le contrôle tridimensionnel des arcades. Ainsi, par le biais du plan d’occlusion, la croissance peut être réorientée, la mandibule repositionnée. Le cone-beam permet désormais de cibler notre action en nous offrant une meilleure lecture des phénomènes de bascule et de torsion d’arcade rencontrés. Cet article a pour objectif de proposer une approche globale des classes II subdivision, mécano-occluso-fonctionnaliste.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document