The korean journal of orthodontics (대한치과교정학회지)

The Korean Association Of Orthodontists (대한치과교정학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Bone cutting capacity and osseointegration of surface-treated orthodontic mini-implants

  • Received : 2016.03.04
  • Accepted : 2016.06.03
  • Published : 2016.11.25
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Objective: The objective of the study was to evaluate the practicality and the validity of different surface treatments of self-drilling orthodontic mini-implants (OMIs) by comparing bone cutting capacity and osseointegration. Methods: Self-drilling OMIs were surface-treated in three ways: Acid etched (Etched), resorbable blasting media (RBM), partially resorbabla balsting media (Hybrid). We compared the bone cutting capacity by measuring insertion depths into artificial bone (polyurethane foam). To compare osseointegration, OMIs were placed in the tibia of 25 rabbits and the removal torque value was measured at 1, 2, 4, and 8 weeks after placement. The specimens were analyzed by optical microscopy, scanning electron microscopy (SEM), and energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDS). Results: The bone cutting capacity of the etched and hybrid group was lower than the machined (control) group, and was most inhibited in the RBM group (p < 0.05). At 4 weeks, the removal torque in the machined group was significantly decreased (p < 0.05), but was increased in the etched group (p < 0.05). In the hybrid group, the removal torque significantly increased at 2 weeks, and was the highest among all measured values at 8 weeks (p < 0.05). The infiltration of bone-like tissue surface was evaluated by SEM, and calcium and phosphorus were detected via EDS only in the hybrid group. Conclusions: Partial RBM surface treatment (hybrid type in this study) produced the most stable self-drilling OMIs, without a corresponding reduction in bone cutting capacity.

Keywords

References

  1. Reynders R, Ronchi L, Bipat S. Mini-implants in orthodontics: a systematic review of the literature. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2009;135:564.e1-19.
  2. 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. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-5406(03)00565-1
  3. Lim HJ, Eun CS, Cho JH, Lee KH, Hwang HS. Factors associated with initial stability of miniscrews for orthodontic treatment. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2009;136:236-42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2007.07.030
  4. Kuroda S, Yamada K, Deguchi T, Hashimoto T, Kyung HM, Takano-Yamamoto T. Root proximity is a major factor for screw failure in orthodontic anchorage. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2007;131(4 Suppl):S68-73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2006.06.017
  5. Lee YK, Kim JW, Baek SH, Kim TW, Chang YI. Root and bone response to the proximity of a mini-implant under orthodontic loading. Angle Orthod 2010;80:452-8. https://doi.org/10.2319/070209-369.1
  6. 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.
  7. Lim SA, Cha JY, Hwang CJ. Insertion torque of orthodontic miniscrews according to changes in shape, diameter and length. Angle Orthod 2008;78:234-40. https://doi.org/10.2319/121206-507.1
  8. Kim JW, Baek SH, Kim TW, Chang YI. Comparison of stability between cylindrical and conical type mini-implants. Mechanical and histological properties. Angle Orthod 2008;78:692-8. https://doi.org/10.2319/0003-3219(2008)078[0692:COSBCA]2.0.CO;2
  9. Chen Y, Shin HI, Kyung HM. Biomechanical and histological comparison of self-drilling and self-tapping orthodontic microimplants in dogs. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2008;133:44-50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2007.01.023
  10. Yu W, Kyung HM. Torque and mechanical failure of orthodontic micro-implant influenced by implant design parameters. Korean J Orthod 2007;37:171-81.
  11. Mo SS, Kim SH, Kook YA, Jeong DM, Chung KR, Nelson G. Resistance to immediate orthodontic loading of surface-treated mini-implants. Angle Orthod 2010;80:123-9. https://doi.org/10.2319/030309-123.1
  12. Kim SH, Lee SJ, Cho IS, Kim SK, Kim TW. Rotational resistance of surface-treated mini-implants. Angle Orthod 2009;79:899-907. https://doi.org/10.2319/090608-466.1
  13. Le Guehennec L, Soueidan A, Layrolle P, Amouriq Y. Surface treatments of titanium dental implants for rapid osseointegration. Dent Mater 2007;23:844-54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2006.06.025
  14. Heidemann W, Gerlach KL, Grobel KH, Kollner HG. Drill Free Screws: a new form of osteosynthesis screw. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 1998;26:163-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1010-5182(98)80007-3
  15. Park HS, Jeong SH, Kwon OW. Factors affecting the clinical success of screw implants used as orthodontic anchorage. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2006;130:18-25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2004.11.032
  16. Chen CH, Chang CS, Hsieh CH, Tseng YC, Shen YS, Huang IY, et al. The use of microimplants in orthodontic anchorage. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2006;64:1209-13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2006.04.016
  17. Chen Y, Kyung HM, Zhao WT, Yu WJ. Critical factors for the success of orthodontic mini-implants: A systematic review. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2009;135:284-91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2007.08.017
  18. Morais LS, Serra GG, Muller CA, Andrade LR, Palermo EF, Elias CN, et al. Titanium alloy mini-implants for orthodontic anchorage: immediate loading and metal ion release. Acta Biomater 2007;3:331-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actbio.2006.10.010
  19. Blumenthal NC, Cosma V. Inhibition of apatite formation by titanium and vanadium ions. J Biomed Mater Res 1989;23(A1 Suppl):13-22. https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm.820231305
  20. Johansson CB, Han CH, Wennerberg A, Albrektsson T. A quantitative comparison of machined commercially pure titanium and titanium-aluminum-vanadium implants in rabbit bone. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1998;13:315-21.
  21. Shah FA, Trobos M, Thomsen P, Palmquist A. Commercially pure titanium (cp-Ti) versus titanium alloy (Ti6Al4V) materials as bone anchored implants - Is one truly better than the other? Mater Sci Eng C Mater Biol Appl 2016;62:960-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msec.2016.01.032
  22. Kim SC, Kim HY, Lee SJ, Kim CM. Influence of surface treatment on the insertion pattern of self-drilling orthodontic mini-implants. Korean J Orthod 2011;41:268-79. https://doi.org/10.4041/kjod.2011.41.4.268
  23. Carlsson L, Rostlund T, Albrektsson B, Albrektsson T. Removal torques for polished and rough titanium implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1988;3:21-4.
  24. Roberts WE, Helm FR, Marshall KJ, Gongloff RK. Rigid endosseous implants for orthodontic and orthopedic anchorage. Angle Orthod 1989;59:247-56.
  25. Johansson C, Albrektsson T. Integration of screw implants in the rabbit: a 1-year follow-up of removal torque of titanium implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1987;2:69-75.
  26. Heidemann W, Terheyden H, Louis Gerlach K. Analysis of the osseous/metal interface of drill free screws and self-tapping screws. J Maxillofac Surg 2001;29:69-74.
  27. Bjursten LM, Emanuelsson L, Ericson LE, Thomsen P, Lausmaa J, Mattsson L, et al. Method for ultrastructural studies of the intact tissue-metal interface. Biomaterials 1990;11:596-601. https://doi.org/10.1016/0142-9612(90)90085-5
  28. Roberts WE. Bone tissue interface. J Dent Educ 1988;52:804-9.
  29. Kim YJ, Cho IH. On the bone tissue reaction to implants with different surface treatment methods. J Korean Acad Prosthodont 2007;45:71-84.
  30. Wennerberg A, Ektessabi A, Albrektsson T, Johansson C, Andersson B. A 1-year follow-up of implants of differing surface roughness placed in rabbit bone. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1997;12:486-94.
  31. Choi SH, Kim SJ, Lee KG, Sung SJ, Chun YS, Hwang CJ. Stress distributions in peri-miniscrew areas from cylindrical and tapered miniscrews inserted at different angles. Korean J Orthod 2016;46:189-98. https://doi.org/10.4041/kjod.2016.46.4.189
  32. Hong SB, Kusnoto B, Kim EJ, BeGole EA, Hwang HS, Lim HJ. Prognostic factors associated with the success rates of posterior orthodontic miniscrew implants: A subgroup meta-analysis. Korean J Orthod 2016;46:111-26. https://doi.org/10.4041/kjod.2016.46.2.111
  33. Oh EJ, Nguyen TD, Lee SY, Jeon YM, Bae TS, Kim JG. Enhanced compatibility and initial stability of Ti6Al4V alloy orthodontic miniscrews subjected to anodization, cyclic precalcification, and heat treatment. Korean J Orthod 2014;44:246-53. https://doi.org/10.4041/kjod.2014.44.5.246

Cited by

  1. Maximum insertion torque loss after miniscrew placement in orthodontic patients: A randomized controlled trial vol.24, pp.3, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1111/ocr.12449
  2. A Brief Review on Micro-Implants and Their Use in Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopaedics vol.11, pp.22, 2016, https://doi.org/10.3390/app112210719
  3. Effect of surface treatment on the mechanical stability of orthodontic miniscrews: vol.92, pp.1, 2016, https://doi.org/10.2319/020721-111.1