Comparison of the success rate between self-drilling and self-tapping miniscrews: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Yi, Jianru; Mengke, Ge; Li, Meile; Li, Chunjie; Liu, Yu; Li, Xiaobing; Zhao, Zhihe

doi:10.1093/ejo/cjw036

Cited by 16 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Success rates were not statistically significantly different between the maxilla and the mandible (90% and 80.4% respectively), in agreement with previous findings [4, 6, 15, 26], but also conflicting with systematic reviews suggesting greater failure rates in the mandible compared to the maxilla [3, 7]. The conclusions may have been affected by the disproportion in sample sizes in favor of greater success in the maxilla [7].…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 81%

“…Maximal insertion torque of 5 to 10 Ncm was deemed optimal for MI success, greater amounts reportedly causing stress, necrosis, and local ischemia [3, 11, 14]. Current clinical evidence suggests similar success rates of self-tapping and self-drilling miniscrews [15]. In addition, immediate and delayed loading as well as healing periods did not significantly affect MI stability [3, 7, 16].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Distance to alveolar crestal bone: a critical factor in the success of orthodontic mini-implants

Haddad

Saadeh

2019

Prog Orthod.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background To evaluate the success rate of orthodontic mini-implant (MI) in relation to implant characteristics, mainly implant distance to alveolar crestal bone (AC) and root proximity (RP) to adjacent teeth. Methods Two hundred sixty MIs (209 in maxilla, 51 in mandible) were categorized into success ( n = 229) and failure ( n = 31) groups. Distances from MI to the most adjacent tooth (DT) and to AC level (DC) were measured on periapical radiographs taken with the orthoradial projection technique. Appropriate statistical tests (chi-square, t test, logistic regression) were applied. Results DC measurements were statistically significantly greater in the success group (7.46 ± 1.7 mm) compared to 3.43 ± 0.81 mm in the failure group. Root proximity was not associated with miniscrew failure. Patient age, mini-implant site, and DC were significant predictors of mini-implant failure ( p < 0.001), which decreased significantly with increasing age (Coef = − 0.345; p = 0.013) and when the mini-implant was placed between premolars ( p = 0.028) or between premolar and first molar ( p = 0.045) . The probability of failure also decreased with increasing DC distance (Coef = − 3.595; p < 0.001). Conclusion The distance to alveolar crest was strongly associated with long-term stability. More apical placement of the MI from the crest would be compatible with a denser and thicker bucco-lingual/palatal bone level.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 81%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Distance to alveolar crestal bone: a critical factor in the success of orthodontic mini-implants

Haddad

Saadeh

2019

Prog Orthod.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…AMSTAR ratings for the reviews are summarized in Table 2 . [2 , 3 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26] All 23 reviews were classified as high, medium, or low quality based on 11 domains. Following our previous classification criteria, a grade of 0 to 3 was considered low quality, 4 to 7 was considered medium quality, and 8 to 11 was considered high quality.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Following our previous classification criteria, a grade of 0 to 3 was considered low quality, 4 to 7 was considered medium quality, and 8 to 11 was considered high quality. A total of 3 articles were deemed to be of low quality, [ 3 , 6 , 7 ] whereas 15 were of medium quality, [ 2 , 8 – 21 ] and 5 were of high quality. [ 22 – 26 ]…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…All 7 articles were published after 2009. [ 8 , 18 , 19 , 22 – 24 , 26 ] Only Schatzle et al [ 26 ] discussed the success rate of all 4 implant types. The success rate of onplant was 82.8% (64.2%, 94.1%), whereas that of the palatal implant was 89.5% (81.9%, 93.9%), the midplate 92.7% (90.1%, 94.6%), and the miniscrew 83.6% (70.9%, 86.6%).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Implants for orthodontic anchorage

Zheng

Sun²,

Zhang³

et al. 2018

Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Implantanchorage continues to receive much attention as an important orthodontic anchorage. Since the development of orthodontic implants, the scope of applications has continued to increase. Although multiple reviews detailing implants have been published, no comprehensive evaluations have been performed. Thus, the purpose of this study was to comprehensively evaluate the effects of implants based on data published in review articles.An electronic search of the Cochrane Library, Medline, Embase, Ebsco and Sicencedirect for reviews with “orthodontic” and “systematic review or meta analysis” in the title, abstract, keywords, or full text was performed. A subsequent manual search was then performed to identify reviews concerning orthodontic implants. A manual search of the orthodontic journals American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics (AJODO), European Journal of Orthodontics (EJO), and Angle Othodontist was also performed. Such systematic reviews that evaluated the efficacy and safety of orthodontic implants were used to indicate success rates and molar movements.A total of 23 reviews were included in the analysis. The quality of each review was assessed using a measurement tool for Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR), and the review chosen to summarize outcomes had a quality score of >6. Most reviews were less than moderate quality. Success rates of implants ranged in a broad scope, and movement of the maxillary first molar was superior with implants compared with traditional anchorage.

show abstract