Huertas VA, Grageda NE

Language: Spanish
References: 11
Page: 47-56
PDF size: 490.09 Kb.

ABSTRACT

The goal of any orthodontic treatment is to achieve the desired movement of the teeth with minimal side effects. Mini-implants have biomechanical advantages that promote a more effective and efficient treatment. The use of orthodontic mini-implants for orthopedic maxillary expansion can considerably reduce undesired tooth movement. A clinical case report of a 13-year-old female who was diagnosed with a collapsed maxilla and treated with an acrylic device with an expansion screw anchored to two mini-implants placed in the palate and in the first molar for the expansion of the maxilla. The aim of this clinical case study was to analyze the separation of the maxillary suture by using orthodontic mini-implants, evaluate the transversal changes at the skeletal and dental level and the secondary effects induced in the teeth used as anchorage. Skeletal changes achieved in the patient treated with mini-implants were: maxillary width increased 3 mm; regarding the dental changes, an increase in the intercanine distance of 3 mm and an 8 mm increase in the interpremolar and intermolar distance were observed. The secondary effect caused to anchorage teeth was buccal tipping of the first molars; in average, the right molar 1° and the left molar 4°. Orthodontic mini-implants are a reliable source for orthopedic anchorage since they provide acceptable skeletal changes with minimal side effects in teeth used as anchorage.

REFERENCES

1. Quiroz OJ. Ortodoncia: nueva generación. Caracas, Venezuela: Actualidades Médico-Odontológicas Latinoamérica; 2003. pp. 342-360.

2. Kanomi R. Mini implant for orthodontic anchorage. J Clin Orthod. 1997; 31 (11): 763-767.

3. Lee JS, Kim KK, Park YC, Vanarsdall RL. Applications of orthodontic mini-implants. Canadá: Quintessence Publishing Co., Inc.; 2007.

4. Rodríguez E, Casasa R, Natera A. 1,001 tips en ortodoncia y sus secretos. Caracas, Venezuela: Amolca; 2007. pp. 86-89.

5. Graber TM, Vanarsdall RL, Vig KWL. Ortodoncia: principios y técnicas actuales. Madrid, España: Elsevier Mosby; 2006. pp. 282-289.

6. Favero L, Brollo P, Bressan E. Orthodontic anchorage with specific fixtures: related study analysis. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2002; 122 (1): 84-94.

7. Parr JA, Garetto LP, Wohlford ME, Arbuckle GR, Roberts WE. Sutural expansion using rigidly integrated endosseous implants: an experimental study in rabbits. Angle Orthod. 1997; 67 (4): 283-290.

8. Howes AE. Case analysis and treatment planning based upon the relationship of the tooth material to its supporting bone. Am J Orthod. 1974; 33: 499-533.

9. Oktay H, Kiliç N. Evaluation of the inclination in posterior dentoalveolar structures after RME: a new method. Dentomaxillofacial Radiology. 2007; 36: 356-359.

10. Kiliç N, Kiki A, Oktay H. A comparison of dentoalveolar inclination treated by two palatal expanders. Eur J Othod. 2008; 30: 67-72.

11. Wilmes B, Nienkemper M, Drescher D. Application and effectiveness of a mini-implant and tooth-borne rapid palatal expansion device: the hybrid hyrax. World J Orthod. 2010; 11 (4): 323-330.