Mechanical and histological evaluation of a titanium device for orthodontic anchorage, placed with or without cyanoacrylate adhesive

Abstract

Objective: The objective of the present study was to perform a histological evaluation of a titanium mini-implant for orthodontic anchorage. Shear strength and fracture patterns that occurred immediately, 30 and 60 days after insertion with or without N-2-butyl-cyanoacrylate adhesive were evaluated. Methods: Ninety-six mini-implants (Arrow, Peclab, Brazil) were placed in the tibia of 9 male rabbits, with or without an adhesive (Vetbond™, 3M, USA). Histological evaluation was done by optical light microscope. Shear strength testing was performed, followed by fracture analysis with visual inspection. Results: Close contact between the newly formed bone and the device was evidenced in the group without adhesive, whereas gaps in the group with adhesive were found. Tukey test showed similar values in both groups at the immediate time point (20.70 N without adhesive and 24.69 N with adhesive), and higher values for the non-adhesive group, after 30 and 60 days (43.98 N and 78.55 N, respectively). The values for the adhesive group were similar for the immediate time point (24.69 N), 30 days (18.23 N) and 60 days (31.98 N). The fractures were adhesive for both groups at the immediate time point. The fractures were cohesive in bone for the non-adhesive group after 30 and 60 days. Conclusions: The mini-implants showed close bone contact and required higher shear strength for removal at 30 and 60 days for the non-adhesive group. Further studies are needed to assess the proper way to remove the orthodontic anchorage without cohesive fractures in bone.

Open bite in adult patients

“…The interaction between Orthodontics and Surgery can achieve results that would not be possible if either treatment was applied independently. 44,50,[55][56]…”

Stability of Mini Implants in the Periodontum during Orthodontic Treatment

“…Despite the clinical advantages of mini-implants, there are some disadvantages, such as the risk of root damage, perforation of the nasal floor or maxillary sinus, dental ankylosis, and lack of space for insertion [5].…”

Adesão de dispositivos ortodônticos utilizando adesivo hidrofílico Transbond™ Plus Color Change e adesivos à base de Cianoacrilato para tração ortodôntica de dentes impactados

“…Diante do fato de que os fluidos bucais interferem de forma nociva na adesão e que a infiltração da colagem é um problema habitualmente encontrado, principalmente em dentes posteriores, prejudicando o uso do adesivo hidrofóbico, os adesivos autocondicionantes são uma opção por serem considerados hidrofílicos, como por exemplo o Transbond™ Plus Color Change 3M, e por suportar a presença da umidade (Deprá et al, 2013). Outra alternativa de adesivo hidrofílico é o adesivo à base de cianoacrilato, que pode ser usado na presença de umidade e quando entram em contato com a mesma polimerizam (Mamede, Martinez & Basting, 2019).…”

“…Os adesivos à base de cianoacrilato são adesivos sintéticos, bacteriostáticos e hemostáticos, que possuem a grande vantagem de polimerizar a temperatura ambiente, quando entram em contato com uma pequena quantidade de fluido, por uma reação exotérmica. Além de serem de fácil manuseio e possuírem um menor tempo operatório podem resultar em melhor estabilidade e maior taxa de sucesso (Mamede, Martinez & Basting, 2019).…”