Changes in Buccolingual Inclination of the Posterior Maxillary Teeth with Forces Applied from the Mini-Implants in the Sagittal and Vertical Direction-A non-Randomized Clinical Study
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15517/6hh65d31Keywords:
Distal movement; Intrusion; Posterior teeth; Mini-implants; Buccolingual inclination; Forces.Abstract
To compare the changes in the buccolingual inclination of the posterior teeth when forces are applied from mini-implants placed on the buccal side of the maxillary posterior teeth in both sagittal and vertical directions. Sixteen young patients requiring distal movement of the maxillary teeth with mini-implants and ten patients requiring intrusion of the posterior teeth with mini-implants were included in group 1(G1) and group 2(G2), respectively. In G1,200 grams of sagittal forces were applied bilaterally using NiTi coil springs from mini-implants placed between the maxillary second premolar and first permanent molar to attachments on a 0.018"X0.025" stainless steel wire in the anterior region. In G2,200 grams of vertical forces were applied bilaterally through an elastic thread from the mini-implants onto a 0.019"X0.025" stainless steel archwire. CBCT scans were taken before and towards the end of distalisation/intrusion. Paired t-tests and Independent t-tests were performed. There was statistically significant buccal tipping of the maxillary second premolar in G2 (p-value of .008) accompanied by mild buccal tipping in G1. However, not statistically significant, mild buccal tipping of the maxillary second molar was observed in both groups. The maxillary first molar though not statistically significant demonstrated lingual tipping in G1 while no changes in buccolingual inclination were noted in G2. There was a clinically significant buccal tipping of maxillary second molar and second premolar in G1 and G2, lingual tipping of the maxillary first molar in G1. Significant changes were observed in the buccolingual inclination of the maxillary second premolars and second molars when forces were applied in the sagittal and vertical direction in the buccal direction. Lingual tipping of the maxillary first molar was noted in the sagittal direction.
References
Kumar V., Ludlow J.B., Mol A., Cevidanes L. Comparison of conventional and cone beam CT synthesized cephalograms.Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2007; 36: 263-269.
Nalc¸aci R., Oztu¨rk F., So¨ku¨cu¨ O. A comparison of two-dimensional radiography and three-dimensional computed tomography in angular cephalometric measurements. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2010; 39: 100-106.
Chang-Seo Park, Jae-Kyu Park, Huijun Kim, Sang-Sun Han, Ho-Gul Jeong, Hyok Park. Comparison of conventional lateral cephalograms with corresponding CBCT radiographs. Imaging Sci Dent 2012; 42: 201-5
Dillenseger J.P., Gros C.I., Sayeh A., Rasamimanana J., Lawniczak F., Leminor J.M., Matern J.F., Constantinesco A., Bornert F., Choquet P. Image quality evaluation of small FOV and large FOV CBCT devices for oral and maxillofacial radiology. Dentomaxillofacial Radiology. 2017; 46 (1): 20160285.
William C. Scarfe, Martin D. Levin, David Gane, and Allan G. Farman. Use of Cone Beam Computed Tomography in Endodontics. Int J Dent. 2009, 634567.
Chien P.C., Parks E.T., Eraso F., Hartsfield J.K., Roberts W.E., Ofner S. Comparison of reliability in anatomical landmark identification using two-dimensional digital cephalometrics and three-dimensional cone beam computed tomography in vivo. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2009; 38: 262-273
Ting S., Attaia D., Johnson K.B., Kossa S.S., Friedland B., Allareddy V., Masoud M.I. Can modifying shielding, field of view, and exposure settings make the effective dose of a cone-beam computed tomography comparable to traditional radiographs used for orthodontic diagnosis? Angle Orthod 2020; 90 (5): 655-664.
Signorelli L., Patcas R., Peltomäki T., Schätzle M. Radiation dose of cone-beam computed tomography compared to conventional radiographs in orthodontics. J Orofac Orthop. 2016; 77 (1): 9-15.
Felicita A.S., Wahab T.U. Intrusion of the maxillary posterior teeth with a single buccal mini-implant positioned bilaterally in young adults with a tendency towards hyperdivergence: A clinical study. Journal of Orthodontics. 2022 Sep; 49 (3): 338-46.
Park H.S., Kwon T.G. Sliding mechanics with microscrew implant anchorage. Angle Orthod 2004; 74: 703-10.
Felicita A.S., Khader S.A. Comparison of two treatment protocols for intrusion and retraction of maxillary anterior teeth using mini-implants: A prospective clinical trial. Journal of Orofacial Orthopedics/Fortschritte der Kieferorthopädie. 2022 Apr 28:1-7.
Madhur Upadhyay, Sumit Yadav, K. Nagaraj, Ravindra Nanda. Dentoskeletal and Soft Tissue Effects of Mini-Implants in Class II Division 1 Patients. Angle Orthod 2009; 79: 240-247.
Felicita A.S., Thomas L.A. Overall treatment outcome achieved during distal movement of the entire maxillary dentition using mini-implants-A single-center analytical observational clinical study. Revista Portuguesa de Estomatologia, Medicina Dentária e Cirurgia Maxilofacial. 2022 Mar; 63 (1): 3-11.
Sreenivasagan S., Subramanian A.K., Chae J.M. Comparison of treatment effects during en-masse retraction of upper anterior teeth placed using mini-implants placed at infrazygomatic crest and inter radicular sites: A randomized controlled trial. Orthod Craniofac Res. 2024 Feb; 27 (1): 33-43.
Polat-Ozsoy O., Arman-Ozcirpici A, Veziroglu F. Miniscrews for upper incisor intrusion. The European Journal of Orthodontics. 2009 Aug 1; 31 (4): 412-6.
Upadhyay M., Yadav S., Nagaraj K., Nanda R. Dentoskeletal and soft tissue effects of mini-implants in Class II division 1 patients. The Angle Orthodontist. 2009 Mar; 79 (2): 240-7.
Marya A., Winoto E.R. Adjunctive controlled intrusion of the maxillary first molar using orthodontic miniscrews. J Surg Case Rep. 2023; 2023 (2): rjad047. Published 2023 Feb 14. doi:10.1093/jscr/rjad047
Felicita A.S., Wahab T.U.L. Minimum volume of infiltrative anesthetic required for pain-free placement of mini-implants: a split-mouth clinical trial. Quintessence Int. 2023; 54 (1): 16-22
Felicita A.S. Quantification of intrusive/retraction force and moment generated during en- masse retraction of maxillary anterior teeth using mini-implants: a conceptual approach. Dental Press J Orthod 2017; 22: 47-55.
Nanda R. Biomechanics and Esthetic Strategies in Clinical Orthodontics St. Louis Elsevier Saunders; 2005.
Mueez A., Gopinath A., Patil N.V., Kumar K.S., Krishna A.S. Determination of Buccolingual inclination in class 2 division 1 and class 1 malocclusion. Journal Of Applied Dental and Medical Sciences. 2016; 2: 4.
Staley R.N., Stuntz W.R., Peterson L.C. A comparison of arch widths in adults with normal occlusion and adults with Class II, division 1 malocclusion. Am J Orthod. 1985; 88: 163-169.
Mitra S., Ravi M.S. Evaluation of buccolingual inclination of posterior teeth in different facial patterns using computed tomography. Ind J Dent Res.2011; 22: 376-380.
Barrera J.M., Llamas J.M., Espinar E., Sáenz Ramírez C., Paredes V., Pérez-Varela J.C. Wilson maxillary curve analyzed by CBCT. A study on normocclusion and malocclusion individuals Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal 2013; 18: 547-552.
Shewinvanakitkul W., Hans M.G., Narendran S., Martin Palomo J. Measuring buccolingual inclination of mandibular canines and first molars using CBCT.Orthod Craniofac Res. 2011; 14: 168-174.
Rola Alkhatib; Chun-Hsi Chung. Buccolingual inclination of first molars in untreated adults: A CBCT study. Angle Orthod (2017) 87 (4): 598-602.
Tong H., Kwon D., Shi J., Sakai N., Enciso R., Sameshima G.T. Mesiodistal angulation and faciolingual inclination of each whole tooth in 3-dimensional space in patients with near normal occlusion.Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop . 2012; 141: 604-617.
Gull M.A., Yaqoob M., Mohammad M., Samirah M. Buccolingual Inclination of Maxillary and Mandibular First Molars in Untreated Adults: A CBCT Study. International Journal of Contemporary Medical Research 2019; 6 (12): L10-L13.
Li C., Dimitrova B., Boucher N.S., Chung C.H. Buccolingual Inclination of Second Molars in Untreated Adolescents and Adults with Near Normal Occlusion: A CBCT Study. Journal of Clinical Medicine. 2022 Nov 8; 11 (22): 6629.
Capps C.J., Campbell P.M., Benson B., Buschang P.H. Can posterior teeth of patients be translated buccally, and does bone form on the buccal surface in response?. The Angle Orthodontist. 2016 Jul; 86 (4): 527-34.
Alansari R.A., Zawawi K.H., Vaiid N., et al. Is the motor-driven insertion of orthodontic miniscrews more advantageous than manual insertion? A micro-CT evaluation of bone miniscrew contact surface area and cortical microcracks in rabbits. Orthod Craniofac Res. 2024; 27 (6): 853-859.
Vogiatzi T., Menz R., Verna C., Bornstein M.M., Dagassan-Berndt D. Effect of field of view (FOV) positioning and shielding on radiation dose in paediatric CBCT. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2022 Sep 1; 51 (6): 20210316.
Grüning M., Koivisto J., Mah J., Bumann A. Impact of thyroid gland shielding on radiation doses in dental cone beam computed tomography with small and medium fields of view. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol. 2022 Aug;134 (2): 245-253.
Yadav K., Al-Dhlan KA, Alreshidi HA, Dhiman G, Viriyasitavat WG, Almankory AZ, Ramana K, Vimal S, Rajinikanth V. A novel coarse-to-fine computational method for three-dimensional landmark detection to perform hard-tissue cephalometric analysis. Expert Systems. 2024 Jun; 41 (6): e13365.
Adel S.M., Vaid N.R., El-Harouni N., Kassem H., Park J.H., Zaher A.R. Quantifying maxillary anterior tooth movement in digital orthodontics: Does the choice of the superimposition software matter. J World Fed Orthod. 2023 Oct; 12 (5): 187-196.
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 A. Sumathi Felicita, T.N. Uma Maheswari.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
ODOVTOS - Int. J. Dent. Sc. endorses CC BY-NC-SA
This license enables reusers to distribute, remix, adapt, and build upon the material in any medium or format for noncommercial purposes only, and only so long as attribution is given to the creator. If you remix, adapt, or build upon the material, you must license the modified material under identical terms. CC BY-NC-SA includes the following elements:
BY: credit must be given to the creator.
NC: Only noncommercial uses of the work are permitted.
SA: Adaptations must be shared under the same terms.
