A Custom-Made Orthodontic Mini-Implant-Effect of Insertion Angle and Cortical Bone Thickness on Stress Distribution with a Complex In Vitro and In Vivo Biosafety Profile

Overview

Journal Materials (Basel)

Publisher MDPI

Date 2020 Oct 30

PMID 33120951

Citations 8

Authors

Adelina Popa

Cristina Dehelean

Horia Calniceanu

Claudia Watz

Silviu Brad

Cosmin Sinescu

Olivia A Marcu

Casiana Simina Popa

Stefana Avram

Mirela Nicolov

Camelia A Szuhanek

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: Orthodontic mini-implant failure is a debatable subject in clinical practice. However, the most important parameter to evaluate the success rate of mini-implant is the primary stability, which is mainly influenced by cortical bone thickness (CBT) and insertion angle.

Materials And Methods: Three-dimensional finite element models of the maxilla were created and a custom-made, self-drilling, tapered mini-implant was designed. For the pull-out test, 12 simulations were performed, sequentially increasing the thickness of the cortical bone (1, 1.5 and 2 mm) and the insertion angle (30°, 60°, 90°, 120°). For the force analysis, 24 simulations were performed using an experimental orthodontic traction force of 2 N both in the horizontal and vertical axis.

Results: Insertion angle and CBT have significant impact on force reaction values ( < 0.05). Cortical bone stress had the lowest value when the mini-implant had a 30° insertion angle and the highest value when the implant had a 120° insertion angle, while the CBT was 1 mm. Cortical bone stress had the lowest value with an insertion angle of 90° and the highest value when the implant was inserted at an angle of 30°, while the CBT was 2 mm independent of the force direction. Regarding the biosafety profile of the mini-implant alloy, the present results reveal that the custom-made mini-implant presents good biocompatibility.

Conclusions: When the CBT is reduced, we recommend inclined insertion while, when the CBT is appropriate, perpendicular insertion is advised.

Citing Articles

Balancing the Load: How Optimal Forces Shape the Longevity and Stability of Orthodontic Mini-Implants.

Panaite T, Savin C, Olteanu N, Romanec C, Vieriu R, Balcos C Dent J (Basel). 2025; 13(2).

PMID: 39996945 PMC: 11854790. DOI: 10.3390/dj13020071.

Exploring the use, perceptions, and challenges of mini-implants in orthodontic practice: a survey study.

Panaite T, Balcos C, Savin C, Olteanu N, Karvelas N, Romanec C Front Oral Health. 2025; 5():1483068.

PMID: 39844864 PMC: 11753234. DOI: 10.3389/froh.2024.1483068.

Surface Analysis of Orthodontic Mini-Implants after Their Clinical Use.

Ioana T, Boeru F, Antoniac I, Mitrut I, Staicu I, Rauten A J Funct Biomater. 2024; 15(9).

PMID: 39330220 PMC: 11433500. DOI: 10.3390/jfb15090244.

The Biological Impact of Some Phosphonic and Phosphinic Acid Derivatives on Human Osteosarcoma.

Khaled Z, Ilia G, Watz C, Macasoi I, Draghici G, Simulescu V Curr Issues Mol Biol. 2024; 46(5):4815-4831.

PMID: 38785558 PMC: 11120618. DOI: 10.3390/cimb46050290.

In vitro study of the orthodontic mini-implants influence on the growth of human osteoblasts.

Moldoveanu A, Nicolescu M, Bucur M, Moldoveanu G, Funieru C, Neagoe I Rom J Morphol Embryol. 2022; 62(3):785-792.

PMID: 35263407 PMC: 9019610. DOI: 10.47162/RJME.62.3.16.

References

Ono A, Motoyoshi M, Shimizu N . Cortical bone thickness in the buccal posterior region for orthodontic mini-implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2008; 37(4):334-40. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijom.2008.01.005. View

Motoyoshi M, Inaba M, Ono A, Ueno S, Shimizu N . The effect of cortical bone thickness on the stability of orthodontic mini-implants and on the stress distribution in surrounding bone. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2008; 38(1):13-8. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijom.2008.09.006. View

Cirligeriu L, Cimpean A, Calniceanu H, Vladau M, Sarb S, Raica M . Hyaluronic Acid/Bone Substitute Complex Implanted on Chick Embryo Chorioallantoic Membrane Induces Osteoblastic Differentiation and Angiogenesis, but not Inflammation. Int J Mol Sci. 2018; 19(12). PMC: 6320888. DOI: 10.3390/ijms19124119. View

Buchter A, Wiechmann D, Koerdt S, Wiesmann H, Piffko J, Meyer U . Load-related implant reaction of mini-implants used for orthodontic anchorage. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2005; 16(4):473-9. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2005.01149.x. View

Chen Z, Patwari M, Liu D . Cytotoxicity of orthodontic temporary anchorage devices on human periodontal ligament fibroblasts in vitro. Clin Exp Dent Res. 2020; 5(6):648-654. PMC: 6934351. DOI: 10.1002/cre2.230. View

Chen Y, Zhao W, Kyung H . [Biomechanical comparison of self-drilling and self-tapping orthodontic micro-implants]. Zhonghua Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi. 2008; 42(10):605-7. View

Singh S, Mogra S, Shetty V, Shetty S, Philip P . Three-dimensional finite element analysis of strength, stability, and stress distribution in orthodontic anchorage: a conical, self-drilling miniscrew implant system. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2012; 141(3):327-336. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2011.07.022. View

Jang H, Kwon S, Kim S, Park Y, Kim S . Effects of washer on the stress distribution of mini-implant. Angle Orthod. 2011; 82(1):137-44. PMC: 8881023. DOI: 10.2319/021411-107.1. View

Noble J, Karaiskos N, Hassard T, Hechter F, Wiltshire W . Stress on bone from placement and removal of orthodontic miniscrews at different angulations. J Clin Orthod. 2009; 43(5):332-4. View

10.

Morarend C, Qian F, Marshall S, Southard K, Grosland N, Morgan T . Effect of screw diameter on orthodontic skeletal anchorage. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2009; 136(2):224-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2007.07.031. View

11.

Woodall N, Tadepalli S, Qian F, Grosland N, Marshall S, Southard T . Effect of miniscrew angulation on anchorage resistance. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2011; 139(2):e147-52. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2010.08.017. View

12.

Toy E, Malkoc S, Corekci B, Bozkurt B, Hakki S . Real-time cell analysis of the cytotoxicity of orthodontic brackets on gingival fibroblasts. J Appl Biomater Funct Mater. 2014; 12(3):248-55. DOI: 10.5301/JABFM.5000165. View

13.

Eraslan O, Inan O . The effect of thread design on stress distribution in a solid screw implant: a 3D finite element analysis. Clin Oral Investig. 2009; 14(4):411-6. DOI: 10.1007/s00784-009-0305-1. View

14.

Liu T, Chang C, Wong T, Liu J . Finite element analysis of miniscrew implants used for orthodontic anchorage. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2012; 141(4):468-76. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2011.11.012. View

15.

Malkoc S, Ozturk F, Corekci B, Bozkurt B, Hakki S . Real-time cell analysis of the cytotoxicity of orthodontic mini-implants on human gingival fibroblasts and mouse osteoblasts. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2012; 141(4):419-26. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2011.12.009. View

16.

Zhang Y, Zhang D, Feng C . [A three-dimensional finite element analysis for the biomechanical characteristics of orthodontic anchorage micro-implant]. Shanghai Kou Qiang Yi Xue. 2005; 14(3):281-3. View

17.

Lonnroth E, Dahl J, Shahnavaz H . Evaluating the potential occupational hazard of handling dental polymer products using the HET-CAM technique. Int J Occup Saf Ergon. 1999; 5(1):43-57. DOI: 10.1080/10803548.1999.11076410. View

18.

Suzuki A, Masuda T, Takahashi I, Deguchi T, Suzuki O, Takano-Yamamoto T . Changes in stress distribution of orthodontic miniscrews and surrounding bone evaluated by 3-dimensional finite element analysis. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2011; 140(6):e273-80. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2011.06.025. View

19.

Cacciafesta V, Bumann A, Cho H, Graham J, Paquette D, Park H . Skeletal anchorage, part 1. J Clin Orthod. 2009; 43(5):303-17. View

20.

Ohiomoba H, Sonis A, Yansane A, Friedland B . Quantitative evaluation of maxillary alveolar cortical bone thickness and density using computed tomography imaging. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2016; 151(1):82-91. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2016.05.015. View