Evaluating Palatal Mucosal Thickness in Orthodontic Miniscrew Sites Using Cone-beam Computed Tomography

Overview

Journal BMC Oral Health

Publisher Biomed Central

Specialty Dentistry

Date 2024 Sep 29

PMID 39343869

Authors

Kale Burak

Buyukcavus Muhammed Hilmi

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Purpose: To comprehensively analyze the palatal thickness of soft tissues and determine optimal regions for the placement of palatal orthodontic miniscrews.

Methods: Cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) images on the coronal plane were obtained from 60 patients (30 female, 30 male; age range 19-45; mean age 32 ± 11), with 3-mm intervals in the regions of the canine (Ca), first premolar (Pr1), second premolar (Pr2), midpoint between the first and second molars (M1-M2), first molar (M1), second molar (M2) and midpalate.

Results: The mucosal thickness measurements between the teeth showed significantly greater thickness in the Ca region at the 3 mm point, in the Pr1 region at the 6 mm point, and in the Pr2 region at the 9 and 12 mm points. At the 9 mm point, the Pr1 region demonstrated greater thickness than the M1-M2 whereas the Pr2 region was thicker than the M1 and M1-M2 regions. At the 12 and 15 mm points, the thickness increased from anterior to posterior: the Pr1 region was thinner than the Pr2, M1, and M2 regions and the Pr2 region was thinner than the M2 region. A schematization was devised for the optimal areas recommended for miniscrews in the palatal region.

Conclusion: The mucosal thickness in the palatal region increases from anterior to posterior except the midpalatal region. Based on the results, in terms of soft tissue, the most suitable place for miniscrew placement is 6 mm from the gingival margin of the teeth and in the median portion of the palate. The findings may guide clinicians in choosing the optimal sites for palatal mini-implants.

References

Thiruvenkatachari B, Pavithranand A, Rajasigamani K, Kyung H . Comparison and measurement of the amount of anchorage loss of the molars with and without the use of implant anchorage during canine retraction. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2006; 129(4):551-4. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2005.12.014. View

Jung B, Kunkel M, Gollner P, Liechti T, Wehrbein H . Success rate of second-generation palatal implants. Angle Orthod. 2009; 79(1):85-90. DOI: 10.2319/010708-8.1. View

Wilmes B, Ludwig B, Vasudavan S, Nienkemper M, Drescher D . The T-Zone: Median vs. Paramedian Insertion of Palatal Mini-Implants. J Clin Orthod. 2016; 50(9):543-551. View

Wehrbein H, Merz B, Diedrich P, Glatzmaier J . The use of palatal implants for orthodontic anchorage. Design and clinical application of the orthosystem. Clin Oral Implants Res. 1996; 7(4):410-6. DOI: 10.1034/j.1600-0501.1996.070416.x. View

Song J, Um Y, Kim C, Choi S, Cho K, Kim C . Thickness of posterior palatal masticatory mucosa: the use of computerized tomography. J Periodontol. 2008; 79(3):406-12. DOI: 10.1902/jop.2008.070302. View

Park H, Kwon T, Sung J . Nonextraction treatment with microscrew implants. Angle Orthod. 2004; 74(4):539-49. DOI: 10.1043/0003-3219(2004)074<0539:NTWMI>2.0.CO;2. View

Ueno D, Sekiguchi R, Morita M, Jayawardena A, Shinpo S, Sato J . Palatal mucosal measurements in a Japanese population using cone-beam computed tomography. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2014; 26(1):48-58. DOI: 10.1111/jerd.12053. View

Wiechmann D, Meyer U, Buchter A . Success rate of mini- and micro-implants used for orthodontic anchorage: a prospective clinical study. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2007; 18(2):263-7. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2006.01325.x. View

Parmar R, Reddy V, Reddy S, Reddy D . Determination of soft tissue thickness at orthodontic miniscrew placement sites using ultrasonography for customizing screw selection. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2016; 150(4):651-658. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2016.03.026. View

10.

Cha B, Lee Y, Lee N, Choi D, Baek S . Soft tissue thickness for placement of an orthodontic miniscrew using an ultrasonic device. Angle Orthod. 2008; 78(3):403-8. DOI: 10.2319/051607-237.1. View

11.

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

12.

Wara-Aswapati N, Pitiphat W, Chandrapho N, Rattanayatikul C, Karimbux N . Thickness of palatal masticatory mucosa associated with age. J Periodontol. 2001; 72(10):1407-12. DOI: 10.1902/jop.2001.72.10.1407. View

13.

Egolf R, BeGole E, UPSHAW H . Factors associated with orthodontic patient compliance with intraoral elastic and headgear wear. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1990; 97(4):336-48. DOI: 10.1016/0889-5406(90)70106-M. View

14.

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(4):373-8. DOI: 10.1016/s0889-5406(03)00565-1. View

15.

Studer S, Allen E, Rees T, Kouba A . The thickness of masticatory mucosa in the human hard palate and tuberosity as potential donor sites for ridge augmentation procedures. J Periodontol. 1997; 68(2):145-51. DOI: 10.1902/jop.1997.68.2.145. View

16.

Moon S, Park S, Lim W, Chun Y . Palatal bone density in adult subjects: implications for mini-implant placement. Angle Orthod. 2009; 80(1):137-44. PMC: 8978746. DOI: 10.2319/011909-40.1. View

17.

Tinsley D, ODwyer J, Benson P, Doyle P, Sandler J . Orthodontic palatal implants: clinical technique. J Orthod. 2004; 31(1):3-8. DOI: 10.1179/146531204225011472. View

18.

Kim H, Yun H, Park H, Kim D, Park Y . Soft-tissue and cortical-bone thickness at orthodontic implant sites. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2006; 130(2):177-82. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2004.12.024. View

19.

Park H, Jeong S, Kwon O . Factors affecting the clinical success of screw implants used as orthodontic anchorage. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2006; 130(1):18-25. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2004.11.032. View

20.

Diedrich P . [Different orthodontic anchorage systems. A critical examination]. Fortschr Kieferorthop. 1993; 54(4):156-71. DOI: 10.1007/BF02171574. View