Article Data

  • Views 723
  • Dowloads 158

Original Research

Open Access

Comparison between effects of mini-implant anchorage and face-bow anchorage in orthodontics for children

  • Zhouwen Hou1,*,†,
  • Xiaowei Qu2,†
  • Lei Hou3
  • Fuying Ren4

1Department of Renmin South Road Outpatient, Sinopharm (Hubei) Stomatological Hospital Co., LTD, 422300 Shiyan, Hubei, China

2Department of Zhuankou Outpatient, Sinopharm (Hubei) Stomatological Hospital Co., LTD, 430056 Wuhan, Hubei, China

3Department of Orthodontics, Sinopharm (Hubei) Stomatological Hospital Co., LTD, 422300 Shiyan, Hubei, China

4Department of Hanjiang Outpatient, Sinopharm (Hubei) Stomatological Hospital Co., LTD, 422300 Shiyan, Hubei, China

DOI: 10.22514/jocpd.2024.022 Vol.48,Issue 1,January 2024 pp.198-203

Submitted: 31 August 2023 Accepted: 10 October 2023

Published: 03 January 2024

*Corresponding Author(s): Zhouwen Hou E-mail: hzw_dr07@163.com

† These authors contributed equally.

Abstract

To study the values of mini-implant anchorage in orthodontics for children in the mixed dentition stage, 78 children in the mixed dentition stage who had accepted orthodontic treatment in our hospital from January 2020 to January 2021 were enrolled into this study. All children were treated with straight-wire appliance. According to their anchorages, children were divided into observation group and control group based on the random number table. Children in the control group used face-bow to control the anchorages and children in the observation group used mini-implants to control the anchorages. After treatment, the upper central incisor convex distance difference, inclination angle of the upper central incisor, displacement of the molar, gingival health, masticatory function, treatment effect and adverse reaction rate of children in two groups were compared. One year after treatment, compared with children in the control group, children in the observation group had smaller the upper central incisor convex distance difference, inclination angle of the upper central incisor, displacement of the molar, small scores of plaque index (PLI), bleeding index (BI) and gingival index (GI), stronger biting force and higher masticatory efficiency, lower adverse reaction rate during treatment, better treatment effect, higher satisfaction of orthodontic treatment. And differences of all the above indexes were statistically significant (p < 0.05). Mini-implant anchorages have good stability and directive force, and have certain values in orthodontics for children in the mixed dentition stage.


Keywords

Orthodontics treatment; Children in the mixed dentition stage; Mini-implant anchorage; Face-bow anchorage


Cite and Share

Zhouwen Hou,Xiaowei Qu,Lei Hou,Fuying Ren. Comparison between effects of mini-implant anchorage and face-bow anchorage in orthodontics for children. Journal of Clinical Pediatric Dentistry. 2024. 48(1);198-203.

References

[1] Erbe C, Heger S, Kasaj A, Berres M, Wehrbein H. Orthodontic treatment in periodontally compromised patients: a systematic review. Clinical Oral Investigations. 2023; 27: 79–89.

[2] Yamaguchi M, Fukasawa S. Is inflammation a friend or foe for orthodontic treatment: inflammation in orthodontically induced inflammatory root resorption and accelerating tooth movement. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2021; 22: 2388.

[3] Yassir YA, McIntyre GT, Bearn DR. Orthodontic treatment and root resorption: an overview of systematic reviews. European Journal of Orthodontics. 2021; 43: 442–456.

[4] Bariani RCB, Bigliazzi R, Cappellette Junior M, Moreira G, Fujita RR. Effectiveness of functional orthodontic appliances in obstructive sleep apnea treatment in children: literature review. Brazilian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology. 2022; 88: 263–278.

[5] Meuffels SA, Kuijpers-Jagtman AM, Tjoa STH, Bonifacio CC, Carvajal Monroy PL. Malocclusion complexity and orthodontic treatment need in children with autism spectrum disorder. Clinical Oral Investigations. 2022; 26: 6265–6273.

[6] Klostermann I, Kirschneck C, Lippold C, Chhatwani S. Relationship between back posture and early orthodontic treatment in children. Head & Face Medicine. 2021; 17: 4.

[7] Tapeshkina MM, Kostritsin AG, Tapeshkina NV, Chernenko SV. Nutrition of children undergoing orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances. Stomatologiia. 2020; 99: 74–77. (In Russian)

[8] Zhang Y, Li K, Li N. The efficacy of orthodontics plus implant anchorage in orthodontic treatment: a randomized controlled study. Evidence-Based Complementary and Alternative Medicine. 2022; 2022: 4049076.

[9] Santos GD, Consolaro A, Meloti F, Cardoso MA, Silva E, Li AT, et al. Negligible tooth resorptions after anterior open bite treatment using skeletal anchorage with miniplates. Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics. 2020; 25: 16–22.

[10] Zasčiurinskienė E, Lund H, Lindsten R, Jansson H, Bjerklin K. Outcome of orthodontic treatment in subjects with periodontal disease. Part III: a CBCT study of external apical root resorption. European Journal of Orthodontics. 2019; 41: 575–582.

[11] Umalkar SS, Jadhav VV, Paul P, Reche A. Modern anchorage systems in orthodontics. Cureus. 2022; 11: e31476.

[12] Wahabuddin S, Mascarenhas R, Iqbal M, Husain A. Clinical application of micro-implant anchorage in initial orthodontic retraction. Journal of Oral Implantology. 2015; 41: 77–84.

[13] Silva C, Albuquerque P, de Assis P, Lopes C, Anníbal H, Lago MCA, et al. Does flossing before or after brushing influence the reduction in the plaque index? A systematic review and meta-analysis. International Journal of Dental Hygiene. 2022; 20: 18–25.

[14] Katsoularis I, Fonseca-Rodríguez O, Farrington P, Jerndal H, Lundevaller EH, Sund M, et al. Risks of deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, and bleeding after covid-19: nationwide self-controlled cases series and matched cohort study. The BMJ. 2022; 377: e069590.

[15] Marçal FF, Mota de Paulo JP, Barreto LG, de Carvalho Guerra LM, Silva PGDB. Effectiveness of orthodontic toothbrush versus conventional toothbrush on plaque and gingival index reduction: a systematic review and meta‐analysis. International Journal of Dental Hygiene. 2022; 20: 87–99.

[16] Miura S, Ueda H, Iwai K, Concepcion Medina C, Ishida E, Kunimatsu R, et al. Masticatory function assessment of adult patients with cleft lip and palate after orthodontic treatment. The Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Journal. 2022; 59: 390–398.

[17] Bichu YM, Alwafi A, Liu X, Andrews J, Ludwig B, Bichu AY, et al. Advances in orthodontic clear aligner materials. Bioactive Materials. 2023; 22: 384–403.

[18] Cordaro M, Staderini E, Torsello F, Grande NM, Turchi M, Cordaro M. Orthodontic extrusion vs. surgical extrusion to rehabilitate severely damaged teeth: a literature review. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2021; 18: 9530.

[19] Losev FF, Arsenina OI, Shugaylov IA, Popova NV, Makhortova PI, Popova AV. Algorithms for orthodontic treatment of patients with maxillary constriction based on the stages of formation of the palatal suture. Stomatologiya. 2022; 101: 52–62.

[20] Rath-Deschner B, Nogueira AVB, Beisel-Memmert S, Nokhbehsaim M, Eick S, Cirelli JA, et al. Interaction of periodontitis and orthodontic tooth movement—an in vitro and in vivo study. Clinical Oral Investigations. 2022; 26: 171–181.

[21] AlMaghlouth B, AlMubarak A, Almaghlouth I, AlKhalifah R, Alsadah A, Hassan A. Orthodontic intrusion using temporary anchorage devices compared to other orthodontic intrusion methods: a systematic review. Clinical, Cosmetic and Investigational Dentistry. 2021; 13: 11–19.

[22] Mousa MM, Hajeer MY, Sultan K, Almahdi WH, Alhaffar JB. Evaluation of the patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) with temporary skeletal anchorage devices in fixed orthodontic treatment: a systematic review. Cureus. 2023; 15: e36165.

[23] Amaral Vargas EO, Otero Amaral Vargas D, da Silva Coqueiro R, Franzotti Sant’anna E, Melo Pithon M. Impact of orthodontic brackets on intraoral and extraoral scans. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics. 2022; 162: 208–213.

[24] Jia H, Zhuang L, Zhang N, Bian Y, Li S. Comparison of skeletal maxillary transverse deficiency treated by microimplant-assisted rapid palatal expansion and tooth-borne expansion during the post-pubertal growth spurt stage. The Angle Orthodontist. 2021; 91: 36–45.

[25] Loca-apichai P, Jein-Wein Liou E. Redirecting mandibular growth through orthodontic dentoalveolar height development in growing patients with Class III malocclusion undergoing maxillary orthopedic protraction. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics. 2022; 162: 510–519.

[26] Zhang C, Xu L, Lin J. Clinical efficacy of counterclockwise rotating the functional occlusal plane using micro-implant anchorage. Journal of Zhejiang University. 2021; 50: 195–204.

[27] Liang W, Tang Y, Huang WB, Han B, Lin JX. Efficacy of vertical control by using mini-implant anchorage in maxillary posterior buccal area for Angle class Ⅱ extraction patients. Beijing Da Xue Xue Bao Yi Xue Ban. 2022; 54: 340–345. (In Chinese)

[28] Copello FDM, Silveira AM, Castro ACRD, Lopes RT, Ko F, Sumner DR, et al. In-vitro trabecular bone damage following mono- and bicortical mini implants anchorage in mini-implant assisted rapid palatal expansion (MARPE). International Orthodontics. 2021; 19: 243–251.

[29] Torres PR, Gil ST, Zubizarreta-Macho Á, Pérez MB, Deglow ER, Tzironi G, et al. Influence of the computer-aided static navigation technique on the accuracy of the orthodontic micro-screws placement: an in vitro study. Journal of Clinical Medicine. 2021; 10: 4127.

[30] Cantarella D, Savio G, Grigolato L, Zanata P, Berveglieri C, Lo Giudice A, et al. A new methodology for the digital planning of micro-implant-supported maxillary skeletal expansion. Medical Devices. 2020; 13: 93–106.


Abstracted / indexed in

Science Citation Index Expanded (SciSearch) Created as SCI in 1964, Science Citation Index Expanded now indexes over 9,500 of the world’s most impactful journals across 178 scientific disciplines. More than 53 million records and 1.18 billion cited references date back from 1900 to present.

PubMed (MEDLINE) PubMed comprises more than 35 million citations for biomedical literature from MEDLINE, life science journals, and online books. Citations may include links to full text content from PubMed Central and publisher web sites.

Biological Abstracts Easily discover critical journal coverage of the life sciences with Biological Abstracts, produced by the Web of Science Group, with topics ranging from botany to microbiology to pharmacology. Including BIOSIS indexing and MeSH terms, specialized indexing in Biological Abstracts helps you to discover more accurate, context-sensitive results.

Google Scholar Google Scholar is a freely accessible web search engine that indexes the full text or metadata of scholarly literature across an array of publishing formats and disciplines.

JournalSeek Genamics JournalSeek is the largest completely categorized database of freely available journal information available on the internet. The database presently contains 39226 titles. Journal information includes the description (aims and scope), journal abbreviation, journal homepage link, subject category and ISSN.

Current Contents - Clinical Medicine Current Contents - Clinical Medicine provides easy access to complete tables of contents, abstracts, bibliographic information and all other significant items in recently published issues from over 1,000 leading journals in clinical medicine.

BIOSIS Previews BIOSIS Previews is an English-language, bibliographic database service, with abstracts and citation indexing. It is part of Clarivate Analytics Web of Science suite. BIOSIS Previews indexes data from 1926 to the present.

Journal Citation Reports/Science Edition Journal Citation Reports/Science Edition aims to evaluate a journal’s value from multiple perspectives including the journal impact factor, descriptive data about a journal’s open access content as well as contributing authors, and provide readers a transparent and publisher-neutral data & statistics information about the journal.

Scopus: CiteScore 2.0 (2022) Scopus is Elsevier's abstract and citation database launched in 2004. Scopus covers nearly 36,377 titles (22,794 active titles and 13,583 Inactive titles) from approximately 11,678 publishers, of which 34,346 are peer-reviewed journals in top-level subject fields: life sciences, social sciences, physical sciences and health sciences.

Submission Turnaround Time

Conferences

Top