The korean journal of orthodontics (대한치과교정학회지)

The Korean Association Of Orthodontists (대한치과교정학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Effectiveness of anchorage with temporary anchorage devices during anterior maxillary tooth retraction: A randomized clinical trial

  • Received : 2018.08.29
  • Accepted : 2019.07.23
  • Published : 2019.09.25
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Objective: This study evaluated the efficiency of anchorage provided by temporary anchorage devices (TADs) in maxillary bicuspid extraction cases during retraction of the anterior teeth using a fixed appliance. Methods: Patients aged 12 to 50 years with malocclusion for which bilateral first or second maxillary bicuspid extractions were indicated were included in the study and randomly allocated to the TAD or control groups. Retraction of the anterior teeth was achieved using skeletal anchorage in the TAD group and conventional dental anchorage in the control group. A computed tomography (CT) scan was performed after alignment of teeth, and a second CT scan was performed at the end of extraction space closure in both groups. A three-dimensional superimposition was performed to visualize and quantify the maxillary first molar movement during the retraction phase, which was the primary outcome, and the stability of TAD movement, which served as the secondary outcome. Results: Thirty-four patients (17 in each group) underwent the final analysis. The two groups showed a significant difference in the movement of the first maxillary molars, with less significant anchorage loss in the TAD group than that in the control group. In addition, TAD movement showed only a slight mesial movement on the labial side. On the palatal side, the mesial TAD movement was greater. Conclusions: In comparison with conventional dental anchorage, TADs can be considered an efficient source of anchorage during retraction of maxillary anterior teeth. TADs remain stable when correctly placed in the bone during the anterior tooth retraction phase.

Keywords

References

  1. Gainsforth BL, Higley LB. A study of orthodontic anchorage possibilities in basal bone. Am J Orthod Oral Surg 1945;31:406-17. https://doi.org/10.1016/0096-6347(45)90025-1
  2. Linkow LI. The endosseous blade implant and its use in orthodontics. Int J Orthod 1969;7:149-54.
  3. Wehrbein H, Glatzmaier J, Mundwiller U, Diedrich P. The orthosystem--a new implant system for orthodontic anchorage in the palate. J Orofac Orthop 1996;57:142-53. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02191878
  4. Melsen B, Petersen JK, Costa A. Zygoma ligatures: an alternative form of maxillary anchorage. J Clin Orthod 1998;32:154-8.
  5. Park HS. The skeletal cortical anchorage using titanium microscrew implants. Korean J Orthod 1999;29:699-706.
  6. Lee JS, Park HS, Kyung HM. Micro-implant anchorage for lingual treatment of a skeletal class II malocclusion. J Clin Orthod 2001;35:643-7; quiz 620.
  7. Kyung HM, Park HS, Bae SM, Sung JH, Kim IB. Development of orthodontic micro-implants for intraoral anchorage. J Clin Orthod 2003;37:321-8; quiz 314.
  8. Maino BG, Bednar J, Pagin P, Mura P. The spider screw for skeletal anchorage. J Clin Orthod 2003;37:90-7.
  9. Park HS, Lee SK, Kwon OW. Group distal movement of teeth using microscrew implant anchorage. Angle Orthod 2005;75:602-9.
  10. Benson PE, Tinsley D, O'Dwyer JJ, Majumdar A, Doyle P, Sandler PJ. Midpalatal implants vs headgear for orthodontic anchorage: a randomized clinical trial: cephalometric results. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2007;132:606-15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2006.01.040
  11. Upadhyay M, Yadav S, Nagaraj K, Patil S. Treatment effects of mini-implants for en-masse retraction of anterior teeth in bialveolar dental protrusion patients: a randomized controlled trial. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2008;134:18-29.e1. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2007.03.025
  12. Garfinkle JS, Cunningham LL Jr, Beeman CS, Kluemper GT, Hicks EP, Kim MO. Evaluation of orthodontic mini-implant anchorage in premolar extraction therapy in adolescents. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2008;133:642-53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2006.04.053
  13. Feldmann I, Bondemark L. Anchorage capacity of osseointegrated and conventional anchorage systems: a randomized controlled trial. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2008;133:339-52.
  14. Sharma M, Sharma V, Khanna B. Mini-screw implant or transpalatal arch-mediated anchorage reinforcement during canine retraction: a randomized clinical trial. J Orthod 2012;39:102-10. https://doi.org/10.1179/14653121226878
  15. Sandler J, Murray A, Thiruvenkatachari B, Gutierrez R, Speight P, O'Brien K. Effectiveness of 3 methods of anchorage reinforcement for maximum anchorage in adolescents: a 3-arm multicenter randomized clinical trial. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2014;146:10-20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2014.03.020
  16. Miles PG. Self-ligating vs conventional twin brackets during en-masse space closure with sliding mechanics. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2007;132:223-5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2007.04.028
  17. Wu TY, Kuang SH, Wu CH. Factors associated with the stability of mini-implants for orthodontic anchorage: a study of 414 samples in Taiwan. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2009;67:1595-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2009.04.015
  18. Dalessandri D, Salgarello S, Dalessandri M, Lazzaroni E, Piancino M, Paganelli C, et al. Determinants for success rates of temporary anchorage devices in orthodontics: a meta-analysis (n > 50). Eur J Orthod 2014;36:303-13. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjt049
  19. Hsieh YD, Su CM, Yang YH, Fu E, Chen HL, Kung S. Evaluation on the movement of endosseous titanium implants under continuous orthodontic forces: an experimental study in the dog. Clin Oral Implants Res 2008;19:618-23. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2007.01513.x
  20. Treil J, Casteigt J, Borianne P, Madrid C, Jaeger M, de Bonnecaze P. [Thearchitectural balance of the face: a 3D cephalometric concept]. Rev Stomatol Chir Maxillofac 1999;100:111-22. French.
  21. Liu YH, Ding WH, Liu J, Li Q. Comparison of the differences in cephalometric parameters after active orthodontic treatment applying mini-screw implants or transpalatal arches in adult patients with bialveolar dental protrusion. J Oral Rehabil 2009;36:687-95. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2842.2009.01976.x
  22. Liu H, Lv T, Wang NN, Zhao F, Wang KT, Liu DX. Drift characteristics of miniscrews and molars for anchorage under orthodontic force: 3-dimensional computed tomography registration evaluation. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2011;139:e83-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2010.07.018
  23. Jambi S, Walsh T, Sandler J, Benson PE, Skeggs RM, O'Brien KD. Reinforcement of anchorage during orthodontic brace treatment with implants or other surgical methods. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2014;(8):CD005098.
  24. Al-Sibaie S, Hajeer MY. Assessment of changes following en-masse retraction with mini-implants anchorage compared to two-step retraction with conventional anchorage in patients with class II division 1 malocclusion: a randomized controlled trial. Eur J Orthod 2014;36:275-83. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjt046
  25. Antoszewska-Smith J, Sarul M, Lyczek J, Konopka T, Kawala B. Effectiveness of orthodontic miniscrew implants in anchorage reinforcement during enmasse retraction: a systematic review and metaanalysis. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2017;151:440-55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2016.08.029
  26. Rizk MZ, Mohammed H, Ismael O, Bearn DR. Effectiveness of en masse versus two-step retraction: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Prog Orthod 2018;18:41. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40510-017-0196-7
  27. Becker K, Pliska A, Busch C, Wilmes B, Wolf M, Drescher D. Efficacy of orthodontic mini implants for en masse retraction in the maxilla: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Implant Dent 2018;4:35. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40729-018-0144-4
  28. Pervin S, Rolland S, Taylor G. En masse versus twostep retraction of the anterior segment. Evid Based Dent 2018;19:111-2. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.ebd.6401343
  29. Alharbi F, Almuzian M, Bearn D. Anchorage effectiveness of orthodontic miniscrews compared to headgear and transpalatal arches: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Acta Odontol Scand 2019;77:88-98. https://doi.org/10.1080/00016357.2018.1508742
  30. Schatzle M, Mannchen R, Zwahlen M, Lang NP. Survival and failure rates of orthodontic temporary anchorage devices: a systematic review. Clin Oral Implants Res 2009;20:1351-9. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2009.01754.x
  31. Aly SA, Alyan D, Fayed MS, Alhammadi MS, Mostafa YA. Success rates and factors associated with failure of temporary anchorage devices: a prospective clinical trial. J Investig Clin Dent 2018;9:e12331. https://doi.org/10.1111/jicd.12331
  32. Liou EJ, Pai BC, Lin JC. Do miniscrews remain stationary under orthodontic forces? Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2004;126:42-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2003.06.018
  33. Buchter A, Wiechmann D, Gaertner C, Hendrik M, Vogeler M, Wiesmann HP, et al. Load-related bone modelling at the interface of orthodontic microimplants. Clin Oral Implants Res 2006;17:714-22. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2006.01233.x