Miniscrews for orthodontic anchorage: a review of available systems.

INTRODUCTION: In recent years, extensive research has introduced novel ways of reinforcing orthodontic anchorage using a variety of devices temporarily anchored in bone (miniscrews). Currently, there are numerous manufacturers with different miniscrew designs on the market. AIMS: The aim of this paper is to discuss the key design features of different miniscrew systems on the market. Furthermore, to present clinical selection criteria of miniscrews in different settings taking into account the determinant factors. METHODS: Review of the literature was carried out using the following search methods: MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL). The search was focused on studies published until January 2018. RESULTS: We studied each individual miniscrew from all the identified manufacturers in details. All the features were then summarised and presented as a clinical guideline for the selection of miniscrews. CONCLUSIONS: In this article, we reviewed the development of miniscrews and outlined the general design features of miniscrews as well as specific design features of the current miniscrews in the market. Extensive research of the current products was carried out to help clinicians better understand the difference between the various designs of miniscrews that can be used.

A randomized clinical trial comparing mandibular incisor proclination produced by fixed labial appliances and clear aligners.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the mandibular incisor proclination produced by fixed labial appliances and third generation clear aligners. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients underwent a course of orthodontic treatment using either fixed labial appliances or clear aligners (Invisalign). Mandibular incisor proclination was measured by comparing pretreatment and near-end treatment lateral cephalograms. Eligibility criteria included adult patients with mild mandibular incisor crowding (<4 mm) and Class I skeletal bases (ANB, 1-4°). The main outcome was the cephalometric change in mandibular incisor inclination to the mandibular plane at the end of treatment. Eligible patients picking a sealed opaque envelope, which indicated their group allocation, was used to achieve randomization. Data was analyzed using a Welch two-sample t-test. RESULTS: Forty-four patients (mean age, 26.4 ± 7.7 years) were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to either the fixed labial appliance or the clear aligner group. Baseline characteristics were similar for both groups: Fixed appliance mean crowding was 2.1 ± 1.3 mm vs clear aligner mean crowding, 2.5 ± 1.3 mm; pretreatment mean mandibular incisor inclination for the fixed appliance group was 90.8 ± 5.4° vs 91.6 ± 6.4° for the clear aligner group. Fixed appliances produced 5.3 ± 4.3° of mandibular incisor proclination. Clear aligners proclined the mandibular incisors by 3.4 ± 3.2°. The difference between the two groups was not statistically significant (P > .05). CONCLUSION: There was no difference in the amount of mandibular incisor proclination produced by clear aligners and fixed labial appliances in mild crowding cases.

Clear aligners generations and orthodontic tooth movement.

Clear aligner technology has evolved over the last 15 years, with these appliances continually being modified to increase the range of tooth movements that they can achieve. However, there is very little clinical research available to show how these appliances achieve their results. This article describes the different generations of clear aligners that are available and highlights their use. However, until more clinical research becomes available, aligners cannot be routinely prescribed as an effective alternative to fixed labial appliances.

Clear aligners generations and orthodontic tooth movement.

Clear aligner technology has evolved over the last 15 years, with these appliances continually being modified to increase the range of tooth movements that they can achieve. However, there is very little clinical research available to show how these appliances achieve their results. This article describes the different generations of clear aligners that are available and highlights their use. However, until more clinical research becomes available, aligners cannot be routinely prescribed as an effective alternative to fixed labial appliances.

Efficacy of the Nance appliance as an anchorage-reinforcement method.

INTRODUCTION: The Nance appliance is widely considered to be an efficient method of anchorage reinforcement; however, much of the perceived advantage is based on clinical judgment. The aim of this study was to assess the amounts of anchorage loss and desired tooth movement associated with the Nance appliance. METHODS: The mandibular arches of 7 beagle dogs were used. The first and third premolars were extracted. Reference miniscrews were placed at the first premolar sites as stable references to measure the amounts of anchorage loss and desired tooth movement. Four beagles were fitted with custom-made Nance appliances on the fourth premolars and orthodontic bands on the second premolars (Nance group). Three beagles were fitted with orthodontic bands on the second and fourth premolars with no anchorage reinforcement (control group). The second premolars were retracted over 15 weeks in both groups. The amounts of second premolar movement (desired tooth movement) and fourth premolar movement (anchorage loss) were recorded at 5, 10, and 15 weeks. The percentages of desired tooth movement and anchorage loss to the total space closure were calculated. RESULTS: The mean desired tooth movement was significantly more in the Nance group than in the control group at 10 weeks (P <0.05) but was not significantly different at 5 and 15 weeks. The mean percentages of anchorage loss to the total space closure at 15 weeks were 45.7% in the control group and 28.8% in the Nance group. The Nance group had 16.9% less anchorage loss and 16.6% more desired tooth movement than did the control group at 15 weeks (P <0.05). Most of the anchorage loss (80%) in the Nance group occurred during the first 10 weeks. CONCLUSIONS: The Nance appliance did not provide absolute anchorage, but there was significantly less anchorage loss with it than in the control group. The majority of anchorage loss occurred during the first 10 weeks in the Nance group.