scholarly journals A clinical comparative study using anchorage from mini-implants and conventional anchorage methods to retract anterior teeth

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 468
Author(s):  
Abhita Malhotra ◽  
Rajat Mangla ◽  
VinayS Dua ◽  
Sridhar Kannan ◽  
Nitin Arora ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Study ◽  
Mini Implants ◽  
Anterior Teeth

scholarly journals Quantification of intrusive/retraction force and moment generated during en-masse retraction of maxillary anterior teeth using mini-implants: A conceptual approach

2017 ◽  
Vol 22 (5) ◽  
pp. 47-55 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Sumathi Felicita
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Anterior Segment ◽  
Applied Force ◽  
Occlusal Plane ◽  
Conceptual Approach ◽  
Mini Implants ◽  
Anterior Teeth ◽  
Clinical Scenarios ◽  
Retraction Force ◽  
En Masse Retraction

ABSTRACT Objective: The aim of the present study was to clarify the biomechanics of en-masse retraction of the upper anterior teeth and attempt to quantify the different forces and moments generated using mini-implants and to calculate the amount of applied force optimal for en-masse intrusion and retraction using mini-implants. Methods: The optimum force required for en-masse intrusion and retraction can be calculated by using simple mathematical formulae. Depending on the position of the mini-implant and the relationship of the attachment to the center of resistance of the anterior segment, different clinical outcomes are encountered. Using certain mathematical formulae, accurate measurements of the magnitude of force and moment generated on the teeth can be calculated for each clinical outcome. Results: Optimum force for en-masse intrusion and retraction of maxillary anterior teeth is 212 grams per side. Force applied at an angle of 5o to 16o from the occlusal plane produce intrusive and retraction force components that are within the physiologic limit. Conclusion: Different clinical outcomes are encountered depending on the position of the mini-implant and the length of the attachment. It is possible to calculate the forces and moments generated for any given magnitude of applied force. The orthodontist can apply the basic biomechanical principles mentioned in this study to calculate the forces and moments for different hypothetical clinical scenarios.

Esthetic segmental retraction of maxillary anterior teeth with a palatal appliance and orthodontic mini-implants

2007 ◽  
Vol 131 (4) ◽  
pp. 537-544 ◽  
Author(s):  
Young-Chel Park ◽  
Yoon-Jeong Choi ◽  
Nak-Chun Choi ◽  
Jong-Suk Lee
Keyword(s):  
Mini Implants ◽  
Anterior Teeth

scholarly journals Comparison of the effects of mini-implant and traditional anchorage on patients with maxillary dentoalveolar protrusion

2016 ◽  
Vol 87 (2) ◽  
pp. 320-327 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yanhua Xu ◽  
Jiye Xie
Keyword(s):  
Treatment Effects ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Maxillary Incisor ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Mini Implants ◽  
Anterior Teeth ◽  
Maxillary Molar ◽  
Soft Tissue Changes

ABSTRACT Objective: To compare the treatment effects of mini-implants as anchor units with conventional methods of anchorage reinforcement in maxillary dentoalveolar protrusion patients in terms of skeletal, dental, and soft tissue changes. Materials and Methods: We searched the databases of the Cochrane Library, PubMed, OVIDSP, CBM, VIP, WanFang Data, and CNKI covering December 1966 to March 2016 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and clinical controlled trials that compared the treatment effects of mini-implants with conventional anchorage reinforcement in maxillary dentoalveolar protrusion patients. Literature filtering, data extraction, and methodological quality evaluation were finished independently by two researchers and disagreements were solved by discussion. Meta-analysis was performed when possible; otherwise descriptive assessment was done. Results: Through a predefined search strategy, we finally included 14 eligible studies. Eight outcomes were evaluated in this study: maxillary incisor retraction, maxillary molar movement, U1-SN, SNA, SN-MP, UL-E Plane, NLA and G-Sn-Pg. Conclusions: Mini-implant anchorage was more effective in retracting the anterior teeth, produced less anchorage loss, and had a greater effect on SN-MP for the high-angle patients than did traditional anchorage. Both mini-implants and traditional anchorage underwent decreases in on U1-SN and SNA. More qualified RCTs are required to make reliable recommendations about the anchorage capacity of mini-implant and traditional anchorage in patients with maxillary dentoalveolar protrusion, especially on the UL-E plane, NLA, and G-Sn-Pg.

scholarly journals A Comparative Study of Temporary Splints: Bonded Polyethylene Fiber Reinforcement Ribbon and Stainless Steel Wire + Composite Resin Splint in the Treatment of Chronic Periodontitis

2011 ◽  
Vol 12 (5) ◽  
pp. 343-349 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vijay Prasad Koganti ◽  
L Chandra Sekhar ◽  
B Ravi Shankar ◽  
A Gopinath
Keyword(s):  
Stainless Steel ◽  
Comparative Study ◽  
Chronic Periodontitis ◽  
Composite Resin ◽  
Steel Wire ◽  
Fiber Reinforcement ◽  
Stainless Steel Wire ◽  
Periodontal Surgery ◽  
Anterior Teeth ◽  
Polyethylene Fiber

ABSTRACT The present clinical study was undertaken to determine the effects of splinting overunsplinted mobile teeth following periodontal surgery and compared the efficacy of two splinting materials, i.e. Ribbond ribbon + Composite with Stainless steel wire + Composite. Materials and methods Total of 30 patients (20 experimental and 10 control) formed the study group. Entire study was extended over a period of 12 weeks for each patient and treatment plan was divided into 8 phases. Healing response was monitored and application, durability, biocompatibility of splint material was assessed. Results Splint had a promising and beneficial effects on anterior teeth exhibiting Grade I to Grade II degrees of mobility. Experimental group showed a greater reduction in tooth mobility compared to control group. There was no significant difference in plaque index and Ribbond Ribbon reinforced with composite resin was an excellent material for application, patient comfort, resistance to fracture, biocompatable and esthetic acceptability. Clinical significance Splinting is recommended as an adjunct to periodontal surgery in the treatment of hypermobile teeth, especially in cases where patient discomfort is a prominent factor. How to cite this article Chandra Sekhar L, Koganti VP, Ravi Shankar B, Gopinath A. A Comparative Study of Temporary Splints: Bonded Polyethylene Fiber Reinforcement Ribbon and Stainless Steel Wire + Composite Resin Splint in the Treatment of Chronic Periodontitis. J Contemp Dent Pract 2011;12(5): 343-349.

scholarly journals Contact of the incisive canal and upper central incisors causing root resorption after retraction with orthodontic mini-implants: A CBCT study

2018 ◽  
Vol 89 (2) ◽  
pp. 200-205 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yichen Pan ◽  
Si Chen
Keyword(s):  
Root Length ◽  
Root Resorption ◽  
Incisive Canal ◽  
Contact Group ◽  
Mini Implants ◽  
Anterior Teeth ◽  
Before And After ◽  
External Apical Root Resorption ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Cone Beam Computer Tomography

ABSTRACT Objectives: To explore risk factors for contact between the incisive canal (IC) and upper central incisors (U1) and to evaluate the relationship between contact and root resorption using cone-beam computer tomography (CBCT). Materials and Methods: This retrospective study used CBCT data of 33 patients treated by a senior orthodontist. Anterior teeth were retracted with mini-implants, and CBCT scans were taken before and after retraction. IC height and width, U1 lingual movement, and U1-IC distance and root length decrease were compared between contact and noncontact groups. Results: Sixteen U1 roots in 11 patients touched the IC. The contact group had lower positioned ICs (2.86 ± 1.10 mm) than the noncontact group (4.07 ± 1.72 mm). The middle of the U1 roots showed more lingual movement to ICs in the contact group (2.30 ± 1.20 mm) than in the noncontact group (1.07 ± 1.16 mm). Right central incisors were closer to the IC than were the left. Root length decreased significantly more in the contact group (2.63 ± 0.93 mm) than in the noncontact group (1.14 ± 0.83 mm). Conclusions: There is a risk for the U1 root to contact the IC during anterior retraction when the IC is lower positioned. This contact might cause external apical root resorption.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document