No abstract

Summary Background/Objectives Primary stability is required for successful use of microscrew. This study investigated correlations among biomechanical, morphological, and clinical values in relationship to root contact and different placement locations. Materials/Methods Thirty-three microscrews were placed between the molars (n = 18) or in the body of the mandible (n = 15) in three pigs. Insertion torque, Periotest, resonance frequency analysis (RFA), and static and dynamic stiffness were measured. Cone beam computed tomography was performed before and after the insertion of microscrews. Interproximal microscrews were divided into root contacted microscrews (n = 9) and non-root contact microscrews (n = 9). Factorial analysis of variance was conducted, with significance set at P < 0.05. Results A significant difference was observed between bodily and root contacted microscrews in Periotest, RFA, static and dynamic stiffness, Tanδ, and bone density (RFA, P = 0.045; all others, P < 0.001). A significant difference was observed between bodily and non-root contact microscrews in Periotest, RFA, and bone density (RFA, P = 0.025; all others, P < 0.001). A significant difference was observed in static (P = 0.01) and dynamic (P = 0.038) stiffness between microscrews with and without contact. Dynamic stiffness (P = 0.02) and Tanδ (P = 0.03) showed significant correlations with Periotest results only in bodily microscrews. Limitations Since a pig bone was used, some differences in the quality and quantity of the bone might be observed between humans. Conclusions/Implications Stiffness values distinguished between microscrews with and without contact. Periotest and RFA results indicated that bodily microscrews were more stable than interproximal microscrews. Periotest and RFA may be useful with large, microscrews and/or in thick cortical bone, but further investigation is required to determine the stability of interproximal microscrews.

No abstract

Background The purpose of this study was to assess the effectiveness of training residents in an orthodontic program in the placement of miniscrews by using cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) images. A total of 90 miniscrews were placed in 15 pig mandibles over a 3-year period by 15 first-year orthodontic residents. Miniscrews were divided into three groups (Control group: no radiographs; 2D group: placement with 2D radiographs; CBCT group: placement with CBCT). Proximity of the miniscrew to the neighboring root was measured. The miniscrew success rate was examined in the graduate clinic from 2015 to 2021. Results The percentage of root contact for each group was: 36.7% (11/30), 20.0% (6/30), 0% (0/30), for the Control, 2D, and CBCT groups, respectively. The CBCT group was significantly different from the Control and 2D groups (p < 0.05). For root proximity, the miniscrews were significantly closer to the roots in the Control (p < 0.001) and 2D (p < 0.001) groups compared with the CBCT group. No significant difference was observed between the Control and 2D groups (p = 0.80). There was no significant difference among the years in the miniscrew success rate. Conclusions Training the residents in an orthodontic graduate program using CBCT may be helpful to avoid root damage and to decrease the miniscrew failure rate.