No abstract

Out of various ways of gaining anchorage, mini implants are gaining attention due to its minimum compliance and maximum curative effects.Mini implants are considered successful if they have sufficient primary stability that comes from mechanical interlocking of mini implant with the bone.Factors which influence the implant stability are bone physiology, implant size, shape and surface characteristics. Considering all other factors within anatomic constraints, what may play a role in primary stability of mini implants is length. Literature search to correlate mini implant length with primary stability was found to be insufficient and hence this study was undertaken. In this study, two goat jaws were subjected to spiral 3D CT scan and the areas with D2 bone density were identified and marked. In these D2 density marked areas, 30 implants of 1.5 x 6mm (GROUP A) and 30 implants of 1.5 x8mm (GROUP B) were placed. Their stability was measured by Radio Frequency Analysis using Osstell ISQ device with its Smart Peg. A connector was fabricated to make the fit of smart peg compatible with the head of mini implant. Readings were made in 5 different directions for each implant and their average value was considered as final reading. It was noted that primary mini implant stability is significantly higher (p 0.034) with GROUP B implants than with GROUP A implants. The increased length of mini-implants positively affects its primary stability and should be taken into consideration when implants are used as anchorage devices.

No abstract

The success of orthodontic treatment depends upon the anchorage. Mini-implants are widely been accepted as anchorage units, due to its size and convenience. However, implant failure is major concern. The placement of implant leads to micro-trauma leading to inflammation, and is found to be major reason of implant failure. Research to improve the stability of mini-implants are on rise. Platelet rich fibrin (PRF) is new generation platelet concentrate, which is found to increase the healing of tissues and hence used in trauma and surgeries. This study was undertaken to find whether PRF can enhance the stability of implant. This single blind split mouth study comprised of 16 subjects above 18 years of age. Group A (consisted of 16 implants which were coated before insertion) and group B (16 implants were normally inserted). The stability of the implant was recorded using resonance frequency analysis at insertion (T0), 24 hours (T1), 2 weeks (T2), at 4 weeks (T3), at 6 weeks and 8 weeks after insertion. Statistically significant findings were found when group A was compared to group B using ANOVA test (p<0.05). The stability of implant of group A (experimental group) at each time interval was greater than group B (control group). The stability of implants was found to be increased when they were coated with PRF than the normally inserted implant.

Background: Currently, orthodontic implants have reached a peak where they are considered a dependable modality to provide temporary supplemental anchoring in orthodontic therapy. When absolute anchoring is a necessity or in cases of minimally cooperative patients, these devices can help manage skeletal anchorage. However, its failure is a serious multi-factorial issue that happens during orthodontic treatment. The stability of the mini-implant is crucial to the outcome of orthodontic intervention. Approaches to increasing the stability of the mini-implant were researched. Hence, this study was carried out to compare and contrast and clinically assess the integrity of orthodontic implants over time. Subjects and Methods: Split mouth technique of treatment was carried out on 16 patients, i.e., one side of the mandible was considered as the experimental group (implant site irradiated with laser after placement), and the other was considered as the control side (implant site not irradiated with laser). Titanium mini-implants of the dimensions 1.5 mm diameter and 6 mm length were employed in the present study. They were positioned in the inter radicular space between the first molar and second premolar in the mandibular posterior region, 7 mm apical to the alveolar crest. During the whole process, the laser utilized was a multimode GaAs diode laser with a wavelength of 980 nm. It had 0.5–10 W output power which was adjustable with the frequency of 1–20 kHz and its main body input voltage was DC12 to further analyze the stability of the implant which in turn would aid in success assessment, the resonance frequency concept was utilized. The readings were recorded (T0) after insertion, (T1) 24 h after insertion, (T2) 2 weeks after insertion, (T3) 4 weeks after insertion, (T4) 6 weeks after insertion, and (T5) 8 weeks after insertion. The higher the implant stability quotient values the greater the stability and hence the optimal loading time. Results: The test employed for statistical analysis was Mann–Whitney U, Kruskal Wallis, and analysis of variance test. After analysis of all the readings, it was found that low-level laser therapy has a significant role in the stability of orthodontic mini-implant. Conclusion: The findings from this study suggest that low-level laser irradiation at the time of implant placement controls the inflammatory reaction around the implant and improves its stability.