CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Eur J Dent 2013; 07(S 01): S083-S088
DOI: 10.4103/1305-7456.119082
Original Article
Dental Investigation Society

Effects of a newly designed apparatus on orthodontic skeletal anchorage

Murat Tozlu
1   Department of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Yeditepe University, Istanbul, Turkiye
Didem Nalbantgil
1   Department of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Yeditepe University, Istanbul, Turkiye
Fulya Ozdemir
1   Department of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Yeditepe University, Istanbul, Turkiye
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
25 September 2019 (online)


Objective: An appliance was designed to increase the cortical bone surface contact area of miniscrew implants (MSIs). The purpose of this in vitro study was to evaluate the effects of this appliance on the anchorage force resistance and the stability of orthodontic MSIs. Materials and Methods: A total of 48 MSIs were placed into bone specimens prepared from the ilium of bovines. Half were placed with the newly designed apparatus and half were placed conventionally. All the specimens were subjected to tangential force loading perpendicular to the MSI with lateral displacement of 0.6 mm, using an Instron Universal Testing machine. The maximum removal torque of each tested specimen was also recorded. Both study and control groups were divided into two subgroups based on whether they had thin and thick cortical bone. Results: The test group had statistically higher force anchorage resistance and maximum insertion torque values than the control group (p < 0.001). The results were found to be more significant in cases in which the cortical bone was thin (p < 0.001). Conclusions: Within the limits of this in vitro study, the present findings suggest that the newly designed apparatus might have a favorable effect on MSI stability in patients presenting with thin cortical bone. Clinical studies are necessary to confirm the results that were observed in vitro.


  • 1 Roberts WE, Helm FR, Marshall KJ, Gongloff RK. Rigid endosseous implants for orthodontic and orthopedic anchorage. Angle Orthod 1989; 59: 247-56
  • 2 Adell R, Lekholm U, Rockler B, Brånemark PI. A 15-year study of osseointegrated implants in the treatment of the edentulous jaw. Int J Oral Surg 1981; 10: 387-416
  • 3 Kanomi R. Mini-implant for orthodontic anchorage. J Clin Orthod 1997; 31: 763-7
  • 4 Chung KR, Kim SH, Choo H, Kook YA, Cope JB. Distalization of the mandibular dentition with mini-implants to correct a class III malocclusion with a midline deviation. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2010; 137: 135-46
  • 5 Lee SJ, Ahn SJ, Lee JW, Kim SH, Kim TW. Survival analysis of orthodontic mini-implants. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2010; 137: 194-9
  • 6 Liou EJ, Pai BC, Lin JC. Do miniscrews remain stationary under orthodontic forces?. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2004; 126: 42-7
  • 7 Morarend C, Qian F, Marshall SD, Southard KA, Grosland NM, Morgan TA. et al. Effect of screw diameter on orthodontic skeletal anchorage. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2009; 136: 224-9
  • 8 Veltri M, Balleri B, Goracci C, Giorgetti R, Balleri P, Ferrari M. Soft bone primary stability of 3 different miniscrews for orthodontic anchorage: A resonance frequency investigation. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2009; 135: 642-8
  • 9 Brettin BT, Grosland NM, Qian F, Southard KA, Stuntz TD, Morgan TA. et al. Bicortical vs. monocortical orthodontic skeletal anchorage. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2008; 134: 625-35
  • 10 Miyawaki S, Koyama I, Inoue M, Mishima K, Sugahara T, Takano-Yamamoto T. Factors associated with the stability of titanium screws placed in the posterior region for orthodontic anchorage. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2003; 124: 373-8
  • 11 Motoyoshi M, Yoshida T, Ono A, Shimizu N. Effect of cortical bone thickness and implant placement torque on stability of orthodontic mini-implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2007; 22: 779-84
  • 12 Wang Z, Zhao Z, Xue J, Song J, Deng F, Yang P. Pullout strength of miniscrews placed in anterior mandibles of adult and adolescent dogs: A microcomputed tomographic analysis. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2010; 137: 100-7
  • 13 Huja SS, Litsky AS, Beck FM, Johnson KA, Larsen PE. Pull-out strength of monocortical screws placed in the maxillae and mandibles of dogs. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2005; 127: 307-13
  • 14 Wilmes B, Rademacher C, Olthoff G, Drescher D. Parameters affecting primary stability of orthodontic mini-implants. J Orofac Orthop 2006; 67: 162-74
  • 15 Nalbantgil D, Tozlu M, Ozdemir F, Oztoprak MO, Arun T. FEM analysis of a new miniplate: Stress distribution on the plate, screws and the bone. Eur J Dent 2012; 6: 9-15
  • 16 Serra G, Morais LS, Elias CN, Meyers MA, Andrade L, Müller CA. et al. Sequential bone healing of immediately loaded mini-implants: Histomorphometric and fluorescence analysis. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2010; 137: 80-90
  • 17 Pickard MB, Dechow P, Rossouw PE, Buschang PH. Effects of miniscrew orientation on implant stability and resistance to failure. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2010; 137: 91-9
  • 18 Poggio PM, Incorvati C, Velo S, Carano A. "Safe zones": A guide for miniscrew positioning in the maxillary and mandibular arch. Angle Orthod 2006; 76: 191-7
  • 19 Chaddad K, Ferreira AF, Geurs N, Reddy MS. Influence of surface characteristics on survival rates of mini-implants. Angle Orthod 2008; 78: 107-13
  • 20 Cha JY, Yoon TM, Hwang CJ. Insertion and removal torques according to orthodontic mini-screw design. Korean J Orthod 2008; 38: 5-12
  • 21 Kim YK, Kim YJ, Yun PY, Kim JW. Effects of the taper shape, dual-thread, and length on the mechanical properties of mini-implants. Angle Orthod 2009; 79: 908-14