• The korean journal of orthodontics
• /
• v.34 no.5 s.106
• /
• pp.458-464
• /
• 2004

Anchorage plays an important role in orthodontic treatment especially in the maxillary arch. In spite of many efforts for anchorage control. it was difficult for clinicians to predict the result of treatment because most of the treatment necessitated an absolute compliance of patients, But recently, skeletal anchorage has been used widely because it does not necessitate patient compliance but produces absolute anchorage. In addition titanium miniscrews have several advantages such as ease of insertion and removal. possible immediate leading and use in limited implantation spaces. In this case, a skeletal Class I bialveolar protrusion Patient was treated with standard edgewise mechanics using indirect active P.S.A. (palatal skeletal anchorage). The miniscrews in the paramedian area of the hard palate provided anchorage for retraction of the upper anterior teeth and remained firm and stable throughout treatment This indicates that the PSA can be used to reinforce anchorage for orthodontic treatment in the maxillary arch Consequently, this new approach can help effective tooth movement without patient compliance, when used with various transpalatal arch systems.

• The korean journal of orthodontics
• /
• v.34 no.2 s.103
• /
• pp.197-203
• /
• 2004

Tweed-Merrifield directional force technology is a very useful concept, especially for the treatment of Glass II malocclusion. It has contributed to treating a favorable counter-clockwise skeletal change and balanced face, while head gear force using high pull J-hook (HPJH) in an appropriate direction is also essential to influence such results. Clinicians have encountered some problems concerning patients' compliance; however skeletal anchorage has been used widely of late because it does not necessitate patients' compliance, yet produces absolute anchorage. In this case, a good facial balance was obtained by Tweed-Merrifield directional force technology using HPJH together with skeletal anchorage, which provided anchorage control in the maxillary posterior area, torque control in the maxillary anterior area, and mandibular response. This indicates 4hat skeletal anchorage can be used to reinforce sagittal and vortical anchorage in the maxillary posterior area during the retraction of anterior teeth. The author used HPJH for torque control, Intrusion, and the bodily movement of maxillary anterior teeth during on masse movement. However, it is thought that such a result nay also be achieved by substituting mini- or microscrews for HPJH. Consequently, Tweed-Merrifield directional force technology using skeletal anchorage for the treatment of Class II malocclusion not only maximiaes the result of treatment but can also minimize patients' compliance.

• The korean journal of orthodontics
• /
• v.29 no.6 s.77
• /
• pp.699-706
• /
• 1999

Anchorage plays an important role in orthodontic treatment. Endosseous implants may be considered adequate firm anchorage. However, clinicians have hesitated to use endosseous implants as orthodontic anchorage because of limited implantation space, high cost, and long waiting period before osseointegration occurs. Recently, some clinicians have tried to use titanium miniscrews and microscrews in treatment due to their many advantages such as ease of insertion and removal, low cost, immediate loading, and the ability to place microscrews in any area of alveolar bone. The author treated a case with skeletal cortical anchorage using titanium microscrew implants. During six months of orthodontic force application from skeletal cortical anchorage, the author could get 4 mm bodily retraction and intrusion of upper anterior teeth. The most outstanding result was a 1.5 mm posterior refraction of the upper posterior teeth. The titanium microscrew implants had remained firm and stable throughout treatment. These results indicate that skeletal cortical anchorage might be a very good option.

• The Journal of the Korean dental association
• /
• v.52 no.9
• /
• pp.532-540
• /
• 2014

In contemporary orthodontic treatment skeletal temporary anchorage devices (TADs) are routinely used as an anchorage reinforcement to provide improved anchorage control with reduced requirement for patient's compliance. For past few decades, various types of TADs have been explored and their clinical application has been expanded. Therefore, the purpose of this article is to present three major types of orthodontic skeletal anchorage devices and discuss their rationale, clinical procedure, insertion site, and potential complications as well as their management.

• The Journal of the Korean dental association
• /
• v.40 no.1 s.392
• /
• pp.68-74
• /
• 2002

• The korean journal of orthodontics
• /
• v.52 no.3
• /
• pp.220-235
• /
• 2022

Objective: To evaluate the available evidence regarding the clinical effectiveness of different types of anchorage devices. Methods: A comprehensive literature search of different electronic databases was conducted for systematic reviews investigating different anchorage methods published up to April 15, 2021. Any ongoing systematic reviews were searched using PROSPERO, and a grey literature search was undertaken using Google Scholar and OpenGrey. No language restriction was applied. Screening, quality assessment, and data extraction were performed independently by two authors. Information was categorized and narratively synthesized for the key findings from moderate- and high-quality reviews. Results: Fourteen systematic reviews were included (11 were of moderate/high quality). Skeletal anchorage with miniscrews was associated with less anchorage loss (and sometimes with anchorage gain). Similarly, skeletal anchorage was more effective in retracting anterior teeth and intruding incisors and molars, resulting in minor vertical skeletal changes and improvements in the soft tissue profile. However, insufficient evidence was obtained for the preference of any anchorage method in terms of the duration of treatment, number of appointments, quality of treatment, patient perception, or adverse effects. The effectiveness of skeletal anchorage can be enhanced when: directly loaded, used in the mandible rather than the maxilla, used buccally rather than palatally, using dual rather than single miniscrews, used for en-masse retraction, and in adults. Conclusions: The level of evidence regarding anchorage effectiveness is moderate. Nevertheless, compared to conventional anchorage, skeletal anchorage can be used with more anchorage preservation. Further high-quality randomized clinical trials are required to confirm these findings.

• The korean journal of orthodontics
• /
• v.31 no.4 s.87
• /
• pp.415-424
• /
• 2001

Anchorage in orthodontics is very important factor for orthodontist to treat malocclusion from diagnosis and treatment planning to end of treatment. Skeletal anchorage like miniscrew is supposed to be more effective method in anchorage control than conventional anchorage which needs patient's good cooperation. So this article will be mentioned about various clinical application of miniscrew through the general investigation and case reports about orthodontic use of miniscrew, specially about screwing area and clinical consideration of miniscrew's screwing on midpalate. The changes of treatment philosophy and methods by using skeletal anchorage were summarized and following results were obtained. 1. The orthodontic anchorage changed from relative concept to absolute one. 2. Bodily movement of teeth gets easier and determinate force system is possible on biomechanical consideration. 3. Some part of treatment that needs surgical intervention is possible by just orthodontic treatment.

• Journal of the Korean Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons
• /
• v.28 no.4
• /
• pp.249-255
• /
• 2002

Recently, Skeletal Anchorage System (SAS) has been focused clinically with the view point that it could provide the absolute intraoral anchorage. First, it began to be used for the patient of orthognathic surgery who had difficulty in taking intermaxillary fixation due to multiple loss of teeth. And then, its uses have been extended to many cases, the control of bone segments after orthognathic surgery, stable anchorage in orthodontic treatment, and anchorage for temporary prosthesis and so on. SAS has been developed as dental implants technique has been developed and also called in several names; mini-screw anchorage, micro-screw anchorage, mini-implant anchorage, micro-implant anchorage (MIA), and orthosystem implant etc. Now many clinicians use SAS, but the anatomical knowledges for the installed depth of intraosseous screws are totally dependent on general experiences. So we try to study for the cortical thickness of maxilla and mandible in Korean adults without any pathologic conditions with the use of Computed Tomography at the representative sites for the screw installation.

• The korean journal of orthodontics
• /
• v.45 no.2
• /
• pp.95-101
• /
• 2015

The aim of this case report is to describe the treatment of a patient with skeletal Class III malocclusion with maxillary retrognathia using skeletal anchorage devices and intermaxillary elastics. Miniplates were inserted between the mandibular lateral incisor and canine teeth on both sides in a male patient aged 14 years 5 months. Self-drilling mini-implants (1.6 mm diameter, 10 mm length) were installed between the maxillary second premolar and molar teeth, and Class III elastics were used between the miniplates and miniscrews. On treatment completion, an increase in the projection of the maxilla relative to the cranial base (2.7 mm) and significant improvement of the facial profile were observed. Slight maxillary counterclockwise ($1^{\circ}$) and mandibular clockwise ($3.3^{\circ}$) rotations were also observed. Maxillary protraction with skeletal anchorage and intermaxillary elastics was effective in correcting a case of Skeletal Class III malocclusion without dentoalveolar side effects.

• The korean journal of orthodontics
• /
• v.37 no.1 s.120
• /
• pp.73-84
• /
• 2007

The maxillary protraction headgear has been widely used in the treatment of skeletal Class III children with maxillary deficiency. A variety of treatment objectives which allow dentoalveolar movements may be established, but when only maxillary protraction without dentoalveolar movement is needed, one of the limitations in maxillary protraction with conventional tooth-borne anchorage is the loss of dental anchorage. This is because a bone remodeling occurs not only at circummaxillary sutures but also within the periodontal tissues. During protraction treatment in the mixed dentition phase, in older children or for the patient with multiple congenitally missing teeth, it is not uncommon to observe undesirable mesial movement of maxillary teeth. Such a side effect can be eliminated or minimized using absolute anchorage such as skeletal anchorage. The purpose of this case report is to introduce a new technique of the maxillary protraction headgear treatment using surgical miniplates.