Comparison of treatment effects during en-masse retraction of upper anterior teeth placed using mini-implants placed at infrazygomatic crest and interradicular sites: A randomized controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: The objective of this prospective study was to examine the efficacy of posterior interradicular and infrazygomatic crest mini-implants for en-masse anterior retraction. METHODS: The 22 patients were divided into two groups. In group 1 (IZC n = 11), mini-implants were placed in the infrazygomatic crests and in group 2 (IR, n = 11), mini-implants were placed in the molar-premolar interradicular sites. Soft tissue, skeletal, and dental treatment effects between two groups were compared using lateral cephalometric measurements. RESULTS: The average angle between the cranial base and A point was 1.01 degrees (P = .004), and the linear distance between the upper incisor and A point was 2.67 to 5.2 millimetres (P = .00). In IZC group the maxillary incisor to the palatal plane moved upward by a mean of -5.20 mm (P = .059), whereas in IR group the incisor movement changed by -2.67 mm (P = .068). There was no significant difference between groups IZC and IR while comparing overall treatment changes on upper incisor position change, angle, and overjet. CONCLUSIONS: Mini-implants placed in between the molar and premolar as well as the infrazygomatic crest can withstand the deepening of the bite during retraction. Mini-implants in IZC are capable of causing intrusion of the anterior teeth and preventing intrusion of the molars, thereby providing absolute anchoring in all planes. Placement of the mini-implants in the infrazygomatic crest resulted in more linear retraction.

Patients' perception of orthodontic mini implants at different sites: anterior vs posterior maxilla.

The aim of this study was to compare patients' overall perception of treatment with orthodontic mini implants placed in the maxillary anterior or posterior region. Twenty young adult patients were divided into 2 groups (n = 10). In group 1 (G1), mini implants were placed in the maxillary anterior midline just below the labial frenum. In group 2 (G2), mini implants were placed bilaterally in the maxillary posterior region, between the maxillary second premolar and first molar at the mucogingival junction. Questionnaires were used to record patient experiences with the mini implants at 3 time points: immediately after placement, 1 week after placement, and immediately after removal. Patients were offered 3 choices representing different levels of intensity. The patients were also asked to record their responses on a scale of 0 to 10 for each parameter evaluated. Each unit was subdivided into units of 10. A score of 0 indicated the best response and 10 indicated the worst response. Statistical analyses included the Student t and chi-square tests. Patients in G2 reported greater discomfort during mini implant placement than did patients in G1 (P = 0.036). During the following week, some patients experienced a bad taste at the site, rated significantly worse in G2 than in G1 (P = 0.043). There was also a statistically significant difference between the 2 groups (P = 0.032) in response to a question about the overall experience of the procedure, with G2 rating it better than G1; in the anterior region, the patients had a mean score of 2.00 (SD, 1.29; 95% CI, 0.22 to 3.78); and in the posterior region, they had a mean score of 0.00 (SD, 0.00; 95% CI, 0.81 to 3.19). There were no statistically significant differences in the distributions of responses for any measured outcome between G1 and G2. At mini implant removal, a greater number of patients in G2 than in G1 found the entire procedure to be somewhat different (unfamiliar) compared with other routine orthodontic procedures (P = 0.004). Despite the scores for the question on overall experience, the responses to questions about individual aspects of treatment indicated that patients with mini implants placed in the anterior region had a better experience than did patients with mini implants placed in the posterior region.

Artificial intelligence-assisted determination of available sites for palatal orthodontic mini implants based on palatal thickness through CBCT.

OBJECTIVES: To develop an artificial intelligence (AI) system for automatic palate segmentation through CBCT, and to determine the personalized available sites for palatal mini implants by measuring palatal bone and soft tissue thickness according to the AI-predicted results. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eight thousand four hundred target slices (from 70 CBCT scans) from orthodontic patients were collected, labelled by well-trained orthodontists and randomly divided into two groups: a training set and a test set. After the deep learning process, we evaluated the performance of our deep learning model with the mean Dice similarity coefficient (DSC), average symmetric surface distance (ASSD), sensitivity (SEN), positive predictive value (PPV) and mean thickness percentage error (MTPE). The pixel traversal method was proposed to measure the thickness of palatal bone and soft tissue, and to predict available sites for palatal orthodontic mini implants. Then, an example of available sites for palatal mini implants from the test set was mapped. RESULTS: The average DSC, ASSD, SEN, PPV and MTPE for the segmented palatal bone tissue were 0.831%, 1.122%, 0.876%, 0.815% and 6.70%, while that for the palatal soft tissue were 0.741%, 1.091%, 0.861%, 0.695% and 12.2%, respectively. Besides, an example of available sites for palatal mini implants was mapped according to predefined criteria. CONCLUSIONS: Our AI system showed high accuracy for palatal segmentation and thickness measurement, which is helpful for the determination of available sites and the design of a surgical guide for palatal orthodontic mini implants.

High degree of consensus amongst an expert panel regarding focal resurfacing of chondral and osteochondral lesions of the femur with mini-implants.

INTRODUCTION: The rationale for the use of mini-implants for partial resurfacing in the treatment of femoral chondral and osteochondral lesions is still under debate. The evidence supporting best practise guidelines is based on studies with low-level evidence. A consensus group of experts was convened to collaboratively advance towards consensus opinions regarding the best available evidence. The purpose of this article is to report the resulting consensus statements. METHODS: Twenty-five experts participated in a process based on the Delphi method of achieving consensus. Questions and statements were drafted via an online survey of two rounds, for initial agreement and comments on the proposed statements. An in-person meeting between the panellists was organised during the 2022 ESSKA congress to further discuss and debate each of the statements. A final agreement was made via a final online survey a few days later. The strength of consensus was characterised as: consensus, 51-74% agreement; strong consensus, 75-99% agreement; unanimous, 100% agreement. RESULTS: Statements were developed in the fields of patient assessment and indications, surgical considerations and postoperative care. Between the 25 statements that were discussed by this working group, 18 achieved unanimous, whilst 7 strong consensus. CONCLUSION: The consensus statements, derived from experts in the field, represent guidelines to assist clinicians in decision-making for the appropriate use of mini-implants for partial resurfacing in the treatment of femoral chondral and osteochondral lesions. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level V.

Comparative analysis of two navigation techniques based on augmented reality technology for the orthodontic mini-implants placement.

To analyze and compare the accuracy and root contact prevalence, comparing a conventional freehand technique and two navigation techniques based on augmented reality technology for the orthodontic self-drilling mini-implants placement. Methods Two hundred and seven orthodontic self-drilling mini-implants were placed using either a conventional freehand technique (FHT) and two navigation techniques based on augmented reality technology (AR TOOTH and AR SCREWS). Accuracy across different dental sectors was also analyzed. CBCT and intraoral scans were taken both prior to and following orthodontic self-drilling mini-implants placement. The deviation angle and horizontal were then analyzed; these measurements were taken at the coronal entry point and apical endpoint between the planned and performed orthodontic self-drilling mini-implants. In addition, any complications resulting from mini-implant placement, such as spot perforations, were also analyzed across all dental sectors.Results The statistical analysis showed significant differences between study groups with regard to the coronal entry-point (p < 0.001), apical end-point(p < 0.001) and angular deviations (p < 0.001). Furthermore, statistically significant differences were shown between the orthodontic self-drilling mini-implants placement site at the coronal entry-point (p < 0.0001) and apical end-point (p < 0.001). Additionally, eight root perforations were observed in the FHT group, while there were no root perforations in the two navigation techniques based on augmented reality technology.Conclusions The navigation techniques based on augmented reality technology has an effect on the accuracy of orthodontic self-drilling mini-implants placement and results in fewer intraoperative complications, comparing to the conventional free-hand technique. The AR TOOTH augmented reality technique showed more accurate results between planned and placed orthodontic self-drilling mini-implants, comparing to the AR SCREWS and conventional free-hand techniques. The navigation techniques based on augmented reality technology showed fewer intraoperative complications, comparing to the conventional free-hand technique.

Effect of the computer-aided static navigation technique on the accuracy of bicortical mini-implants placement site for maxillary skeletal expansion appliances: an in vitro study.

The objective of the present study was to evaluate and compare the effect of the computer-aided static navigation technique on the accuracy of the maxillary skeletal expansion (MSE) appliances. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Forty orthodontic self-drilling mini-implants were placed in ten anatomically based standardized polyurethane models of a completely edentulous upper maxilla, manufactured using a 3D impression procedure. The four orthodontic self-drilling mini-implants for anchoring the MSE appliance were digitally planned on 3D planning software, based on preoperative cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) scan and a 3D extraoral surface scan. Afterwards, the surgical templates were virtually planned and manufactured using stereolithography. Subsequently, the orthodontic self-drilling mini-implants were placed an postoperative CBCT scans were performed. Finally, coronal entry-point, apical end-point and angular deviations were calculated using a t-test for independent samples or a non-parametric Signed Rank test. RESULTS: Statistically significant differences were not shown at coronal entry-point (p = 0.13), apical end-point (p = 0.41) and angular deviations (p = 0.27) between the planned and performed orthodontic self-drilling mini-implants. CONCLUSIONS: Computer-aided static navigation technique enables accurate orthodontic mini-implant placement for the MSE appliances.

Systematic review and network meta-analysis of the accuracy of the orthodontic mini-implants placed in the inter-radicular space by image-guided-based techniques.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the present systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) is to analyze the accuracy of image-guided-based orthodontic mini-implants placement techniques in the inter-radicular space. METHODS: The study was conducted under the PRISMA recommendations. Three databases were searched up to July 2022. In vitro randomized experimental trials (RETs) including static computer-aided implant surgery (s-CAIS), mixed reality (MR), soft tissue static computer-aided implant surgery (ST s-CAIS) and conventional free-hand technique (FHT) for the orthodontic mini-implants placement in the inter-radicular space were selected. The risk of bias was assessed using the Current Research Information System scale. A random effects model was used in the NMA. Direct comparisons were combined with a random effects model in a frequentist NMA to estimate indirect comparisons, and the estimated effect size of the comparisons between techniques were analyzed by difference of means. Inconsistency was assessed with the Q test, with a significance level of p < 0.05, and a net heat plot. RESULTS: A total of 92 articles was identified, and 8 RETs (8 direct comparisons of 4 techniques) were included in the NMA, which examined 4 orthodontic mini-implants placement techniques: s-CAIS, MR, ST s-CAIS, and FHT. Taking FHT as reference, s-CAIS and ST s-CAIS showed statistically significant coronal and apical deviation. In addition, s-CAIS showed statistically significant angular deviation. However, MR did not show statistically significant differences with respect to FHT, which presented the highest p-score. At the coronal deviation, ST s-CAIS presented the highest P-score (0.862), followed by s-CAIS (0.721). At the apical deviation, s-CAIS presented the highest P-score (0.844), followed by ST s-CAIS (0.791). Finally, at the angular deviation s-CAIS presented again the highest P-score (0.851). CONCLUSIONS: Within the limitations of this study, it was found that the image-guided-based orthodontic mini-implants placement techniques showed more accuracy than the free-hand conventional placement technique; specially the computer-aided static navigation techniques for the orthodontic mini-implants placed in the inter-radicular space.

Biomechanical comparison of different framework materials in mandibular overdenture prosthesis supported with implants of different sizes: a finite element analysis.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study is to evaluate the stresses on the supporting bone, implants, and framework materials under masticatory forces in mandibular overdenture prostheses modeled with different framework materials and different implant types, using the Finite Element Analysis (FEA). METHODS: For the finite element modeling, two identical mandibular jaw models were created; one with two standard (diameter:4.1 mm/12 mm length) and the other with two mini-implants (diameter:2.4 mm/12 mm length) were placed in the canine teeth area. The polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) denture was modeled upon them, supported by Cobalt Chromium alloy (CoCr), Poly-ether ether ketone (PEEK), and Zantex materials with framework. No framework was added as a control model; only PMMA overdenture prosthesis was modeled. RESULTS: Regardless of the framework materials of the overdenture prostheses, the stress values ​​on mini-implants in all models yielded approximately two times higher results comparing to standard implants. More stress transmission was observed in the supporting bone and implants in the control prostheses and overdenture prostheses supported with respectively PEEK, Zantex, CoCr alloy frameworks, respectively. In the framework materials, more stress occurred on CoCr, Zantex and PEEK in that order. CONCLUSION: In the light of this study, the use of mini-implants as an alternative to standard implants is not promising in terms of distribution and transmission of chewing stresses. As a framework material, standard rigid metal alloys were found to be more advantageous than polymer materials in terms of stress distribution.

Evaluation of expansion forces of five pure bone-borne maxillary expander designs anchored with orthodontic mini-implants: An in vitro study.

AIM: This in vitro study investigates the limit of expansion forces and torque wrench forces developed by five skeletal bone expander designs (MICRO 2/4 expanders™) for clinical application. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of 30 skeletal expanders were placed in artificial bone blocks and mechanically tested, simulating maxillary expansion. Differences in jackscrew (Dentaurum™ [D], Superscrew™ [S] and Powerscrew™ [P]), number of orthodontic mini-implants (OMIs; two or four) and their placement inclinations (parallel 0° or 10° inclination) form five designs (D4/10°, S4/0°, S4/10°, P4/10° and P2/10°). Expansion forces and torque wrench values were registered, and radiographs were made initially and after 4 mm of expansion. Stress-strain curves were obtained after successive activations and the statistical analysis was performed as appropriate. RESULTS: Plastic deformations in the OMIs and jackscrew occurred around the activation numbers 11-13, with torque wrench values in the range of 500-700 cN. The maximum expansion forces in expanders with four OMIs varied from 93.0 (D4/10°) to 166.6 N (P4/10°) whereas two OMI expanders (P2/10°) registered forces of 79.4 N. Radiographs revealed during loads bending forces (S4/00°, S4/10°) with jackscrew and OMIs deformation in a convex shape, and shear forces (P4/10°, P2/10°) demonstrated only OMIs deformation in a concave shape, providing 15% more expansive force. The jackscrew D4/10° did not have any deformation, but its wire key did not allow reliable activations from activation number 10 and compared to S4/10° and P4/10°, these expanders provided greater expansion forces (P = 0.000 and P = 0.032, respectively). CONCLUSION: The different results obtained in stability and expansion forces indicate that if the activations are carried out under extreme conditions, they may have clinical importance with deformations and non-working expansion mechanics. Jackscrew designs play an important role in expansive forces and expander stability. Torque wrench values can be used clinically as a tool to asses the expansion forces and to avoid deformations.

Clinical Outcomes of Three versus Four Mini-Implants Retaining Mandibular Overdenture: A 5-Year Randomized Clinical Trial.

Background and Objectives: Due to a lack of long-term clinical studies that would clarify whether the insertion of three mini-implants (MDIs) can be as successful treatment as the insertion of four MDIs for the retention of mandibular overdentures (ODs), this 5-year prospective cohort study was set up. Materials and Methods: Participants (n = 83) randomly received either four or three MDIs and a mandibular OD. Clinical examinations were performed at the baseline, as well as after one, three, and five years, respectively. A total of 73 participants (38 in the four-MDI and 35 in the three-MDI groups) partook in the study. The marginal bone level change, success and survival rates, and prosthodontic maintenance were assessed. Results: Repeated measures showed that the mean peri-implant bone loss increased progressively at a small amount over five years in both groups (four-MDI group = -0.36 ± 0.74; three-MDI group = -0.33 ± 0.27 mm; p < 0.05). However, an ANCOVA revealed no significant effects of the group (no significant difference between the three- and the four-MDI groups; F = 0.085; p = 0.771), gender (F = 0.023; p = 0.88), or covariate age (F = 1.95; p = 0.167) on the dependent variable: the 5-year MBL change. The success rate (together with successful survival) was 93.8% in the four-MDI group and 91.7% in the three-MDI group. The log-rank (Mantel-Cox) test revealed no significant differences between them (X2 = 0.373; p = 0.541). Conclusions: In patients with narrow ridges, the insertion of three MDIs in the mandible for overdenture retention can be equally as successful as the insertion of four MDIs.

Mini-Implants Retaining Removable Partial Dentures in Subjects without Posterior Teeth: A 5-Year Prospective Study Comparing the Maxilla and the Mandible.

Background and objectives: Long-term studies of clinical outcomes of mini-implants (MDIs) in the first premolar/canine sites retaining a bilateral free-ending removable partial dentures (RPD) in Kennedy class I subjects have not been well documented. The aim was to assess clinical outcomes in a prospective 5-year cohort study comparing the mandible and maxilla. Material and Methods: Participants (n = 92) who received two MDIs each and a new RPD were reviewed after one, three and five years. A total of 71 participants (82 mini-implants in the mandible; 58 in the maxilla) completed the study. Marginal bone level change, success, survival rates, Modified Plaque (MPI) and Bleeding Indices (MBI) were assessed. Results: The five-year success rate was 93.3% and 93.4% (p > 0.05), in the mandible and the maxilla, respectively. Mean peri-implant bone loss (MBL) increased significantly over five years (p < 0.01) to 0.50 mm in the mandible and 0.52 mm in the maxilla. Age had a significant effect on the MBL (higher rates in younger participants), while jaw of insertion, gender, and antagonistic jaw status did not. MPI and MBI were not significantly correlated with MBL. Conclusions: The insertion of two MDIs in previous first premolar/canine sites for retention of a free-end saddle RPD can be a successful treatment modality in subjects with narrow alveolar ridges.

Skeletal Anchorage Augmentation in Extraction/Nonextraction Orthodontic Treatment: A Randomized Clinical Study.

AIM: To evaluate and compare skeletal, dental, and soft tissue parameters by therapeutic extraction of first premolar and nonextraction distalization of maxillary and mandibular arches in bimaxillary proclination using the skeletal anchorage system. MATERIALS AND METHODS: About 40 orthodontic patients undergoing extraction or nonextraction treatment are enrolled in a randomized clinical trial. Participants are randomly assigned to either the extraction or nonextraction group and receive treatment augmented with skeletal anchorage. Mini implants were placed in the extraction group for retraction and infra-zygomatic crest (IZC) and buccal shelf screws were placed in the nonextraction group for distalization. OBSERVATIONS AND RESULTS: Comparison between the ages of the patients among both Groups showed no significant difference. A significant difference is observed in dental and soft tissue parameters before and after the treatment in group A, whereas skeletal parameters also showed significant changes along with dental and soft tissue parameters in group B. CONCLUSION: There is a significant change in the position of incisors by retraction and facial profile improves gradually in group A while for group B, a marked change in lower facial height was even seen. On comparing both the groups, a highly significant difference can be seen with respect to the amount of incisor retraction and change in molar inclination. The time taken for retraction of incisors is less in comparison to distalization. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: With this, we can easily avoid premolar extraction, and in cases of impacted third molars distalization as when indicated can be helpful as a part of the nonextraction treatment plan.

Use of mini implants for the two-implant retained mandibular overdenture: A prospective study.

Background: The two-implant retained mandibular overdenture utilizing nonsplinted implants is a proven treatment modality for completely edentulous patients. However, a lacuna still exists regarding the suitability of mini dental implants for this purpose. The purpose of the study was to evaluate implant stability and crestal bone loss in single-piece mini dental implants loaded with immediate or conventional loading protocols to retain a mandibular overdenture. Method: Twenty-four completely edentulous patients were rehabilitated using conventional maxillary complete denture and a mandibular two-implant retained overdenture utilizing nonsplinted single piece mini implants. The implants were loaded with immediate or conventional loading protocols. Implant stability (with Periotest TM) and crestal bone loss (with radiovisiograph and radiographic grid) were evaluated at the time of loading and at one, two, and six months after loading. Statistical analysis was done with the Independent Samples "t" test and One-Way ANOVA. Results: Mean Periotest Values observed were significantly more negative in implants loaded with the conventional loading protocol. Crestal bone loss was significantly lesser in the immediate loading protocol but was still higher than the requisite 1.5 mm postulated by established criteria. Conclusion: Two single-piece nonsplinted mini implants may be sufficient to retain a mandibular overdenture utilizing the immediate loading protocol. Further studies with a longer duration of observation and larger sample size are required.

Micro-angiogenic patterns around orthodontic implants migrating in bone: A micro-CT study in the rat tail model.

AIM: Recent studies revealed that implants can migrate in bone when subjected to continuous loading. Since this process is suspected to be accompanied by bone remodelling, which requires blood vessel formation, the present work aimed at assessing the micro-angiogenic patterns around migrating implants. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In 16 rats, two customized implants were placed in a single tail vertebra and connected with contraction springs (forces: 0 N, 0.5 N, 1.0 N, 1.5 N). After 2 or 8 weeks of loading, the animals were scanned by micro-CT before and after vasculature perfusion with a silicone rubber. Vessels were segmented by subtraction of the two micro-CT scans. Vessel thickness (V.Th), vessel volume per total volume (VV/TV), and vascular spacing (V.Sp) were assessed in a peri-implant volume of interest (VOI) around each implant. RESULTS: At 2 weeks of loading, force magnitude was significantly associated with VV/TV and V.Th values (χ2  = 10.942, p < .001 and χ2  = 6.028, p = .010, respectively). No significant differences were observed after 8 weeks of loading. CONCLUSIONS: Within the limitations of an animal study, peri-implant vessel thickness and density were associated with force magnitude in the early loading phase, whereas effects diminished after 8 weeks of loading.

Effect of placement angle, diameter, length and bone density on the pull-out strength of orthodontic mini-implants: An in vitro study.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of the placement angle, diameter, length and bone density on the mechanical stability of orthodontic mini-implants by measuring their pull-out strengths. DESIGN: A total of 120 mini-implants of four different dimensions made from titanium were used. They measured 1.3 × 6.0mm, 1.3 × 8.0 mm, 1.5 × 6.0 mm and 1.5 × 8.0 mm. Synthetic polyurethane bone blocks (Saw Bones, USA) in two different densities were used. SETTING: Each size of mini-implant was inserted equidistantly into synthetic bone blocks of two different densities, in three different insertion angles of 30°, 60° and 90°. This resulted in 24 test groups with five mini-implants allocated to each group. METHODS: The pull-out strength was measured using an Instron Universal Testing Machine exerting a vertical force parallel to the long axis of the mini-implant until removal or failure occurred. Peak load at failure of the mini-implant was recorded in kN. RESULTS: Showed that mini-implants placed at an insertion angle of 30° offered least resistance to pull-out. Mini-implants 6.0 mm in length showed less pull-out strength compared to the longer 8.0-mm mini-implants. Mini-implants 1.3 mm in diameter provided similar pull-out values as 1.5-mm mini-implants. Bone densities of 0.20 g/cc and 0.32 g/cc did not affect the pull-out strength of mini-implants. CONCLUSION: From the study, it was concluded that a logical choice of mini-implant dimension and prudent use of placement technique can help achieve the treatment goals with a reduced hazard of mini-implant failure.

Immediate versus delayed loading of strategic mini-implants under existing removable partial dentures: patient satisfaction in a multi-center randomized clinical trial.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate and compare the effects of the immediate and delayed loading of strategic mini-implants (MIs) on the satisfaction of patients with removable partial dentures (RPDs). MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this multi-center randomized clinical trial, strategic MIs were inserted under 79 RPDs in 76 participants. Two questionnaires, one for the upper jaw and one for the lower jaw, were given before surgical intervention and 2 weeks, 4 months, 4.5 months, 1 year, 2 years, and 3 years after implant insertion. To estimate the loading effect (immediate vs. delayed) in terms of the odds ratio, an ordinal logistic regression model was used. The Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed-rank test, which was corrected for clusters in the patient population, was used to evaluate changes in patient satisfaction. RESULTS: After 4 months, a statistically significant difference in favor of the immediate loading group was recognized in terms of the overall satisfaction score. The patient satisfaction scores recorded after 4.5 months and 1, 2, and 3 years showed substantial improvements compared with the scores recorded before implant insertion in both groups. At the item level, substantial improvements were noted in the following domains: general satisfaction, RPD retention, stability, support, eating, speaking, and aesthetics. CONCLUSIONS: Strategic MIs improved the satisfaction of patients with RPDs during the medium-term follow-up period. An earlier improvement in the satisfaction of patients with RPDs was seen after immediate loading of the MIs as compared with delayed loading. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Inserting MIs under existing RPDs can improve patients' satisfaction with their RPDs in several domains.

Rehabilitation of a patient with mini-implants after avulsion of the upper incisors: A 13-year follow up.

Treatment following avulsion of a tooth in the growing patient requires a complex multidisciplinary therapeutic approach for the clinical team. The literature offers different therapeutic solutions following the avulsion of one or more teeth, but unfortunately all of them have negative repercussions on the patients' life quality, they involve long treatment plans, they are not always feasible, and they have limits. Alternatively, a new treatment concept that uses mini-implants can be considered and is presented with its rationale, clinical steps and 13 years of follow up of one case.

Assessment of Insertion Torque of Mini-implant and Its Correlation with Primary Stability and Pain Levels in Orthodontic Patients.

AIM: The aim of this study was to assess the insertion torque of the mini-implant used in orthodontic patients and to assess the correlation between the insertion torque, primary stability, and perception of pain in patients undergoing orthodontic therapy with mini-implant-augmented anchorage. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Among the patients undergoing orthodontic therapy, 31 samples who required mini-implant for anchorage purpose were selected. A total of 59 mini-implants were placed in these patients. This included interradicular mini-implants and extra-alveolar mini-screws. Immediately after placement, the insertion torque in all these was measured using a digital torque meter and primary stability was assessed by identifying any mobility of the implant placed. Primary stability was noted at two time intervals immediate post-placement and 1 week after that. All the mini-implants that were considered in this study were immediately loaded. Patients were asked to record any pain experienced on the visual analog scale (VAS) score sheet at 24 hours and 1 week post-placement. RESULTS: Among the mini-implants placed, those with 2 mm diameter needed higher placement torque, i.e., infrazygomatic crest mini-implants and buccal shelf mini-implants were placed with average placement torque of 10.08 and 10.25 N cm, respectively. Extra-alveolar screws caused more pain, especially higher in the mandible than the maxilla. Decrease in pain scores was noted from T0 to T1 in almost all the cases. CONCLUSION: Thicker mini-implant needed more insertion torque and highest insertion torque was recorded with extra-alveolar screws. No direct correlation could be obtained with the pain levels experienced by the patients and with the primary stability of the mini-implants. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Mini-implants placed with an insertion torque above the recommended range tend to fail and break more often. Patients placed with extra-alveolar bone screws reported more pain than that of the smaller-dimension mini-implant.

Maxillary Incisor Intrusion Using Two Conventional Intrusion Arches and Mini Implants: A Prospective Study.

AIM AND OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare cephalometrically the rate of maxillary incisor intrusion using mini implants, Connecticut intrusion arches, and segmental intrusion arches. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty-two adult patients with deep bite were divided into three groups: 10 patients in mini implant and Connecticut intrusion arch group each and 12 patients in segmental intrusion arch group. Bilateral mini implants were used for intrusion in Group 1. Connecticut intrusion arch and Burstone's three-piece intrusion arch were used for intrusion in Group 2 and Group 3, respectively. Intrusion was carried out in all the patients for 4 months. Lateral cephalograms were taken just after alignment and leveling (T1) and after 4 months of intrusion (T2). RESULTS: The mean amount of intrusion observed was 1.7 mm (0.425 mm/month) in mini implant group, 1.4 mm (0.35 mm/month) in Connecticut intrusion arch group, and 1.66 mm (0.415 mm/month) in segmental intrusion arch group. No statistically significant difference was found in the extent of incisor intrusion in the three groups (p <0.05). CONCLUSION: The study failed to reject the null hypothesis, and there was no statistically significant difference in the amount and rate of incisor intrusion achieved among the three groups (p >0.05). CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Significant amount of incisor intrusion was carried out by all the three methods. There was no statistically significant difference in the amount and rate of incisor intrusion achieved by the three methods. Clinically, mini implants can be considered superior to the conventional techniques as it provides absolute anchorage which eliminates unwanted effects of incisor intrusion.

A cohort study on short mini-implants for mandibular overdentures compared to those of standard length.

OBJECTIVES: To assess peri-implant bone level, survival and success rates of short (6 or 8 mm long) one-piece mini-implants (MDIs) in edentulous patients with extremely resorbed alveolar ridge (interforaminal height <10 mm) rehabilitated with mandibular implant overdentures and to compare them with patients having standard length MDIs in 1-year prospective clinical study. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The Short MDI group consisted of 28 participants with interforaminal height ≤10 mm. Implants being, both, short and slim (short MDIs: 6 or 8 mm long, 2 or 2.5 mm wide) were inserted. The Standard-MDI group included 35 participants (interforaminal height >13 mm) who received standard length MDIs (10-14 mm long, 2 or 2.5 mm wide). Primary outcomes were assessments of MDI peri-implant bone level, survival and success rates; secondary outcomes were assessments of peri-implant tissue, oral hygiene, and prosthodontic maintenance. RESULTS: The Short MDI group had mean marginal bone loss (MBL) of 0.26 ± 0.35 mm, 6.4% of failure, and 92.6% of, both, success and survival rates. The Standard-MDI group had mean MBL of 0.34 ± 0.40 mm, 5% of failure, 95% of survival, and 94.3% success. There were no significant differences in MBL (p = .420), survival (p = .414), and success (p = .571) between the groups. The Short MDI group had significantly less plaque (p = .001) and bleeding on probing (p < .001). CONCLUSION: Within the limitations of this study, short MDIs (6 or 8 mm long) in extremely atrophied mandibles (interforaminal height <10 mm) showed good clinical results in the first year of function.