Journals / ADO Klinik Bilimler Dergisi / 2012 / Cilt: 6 - Sayı: 3

Risks and Complications of Orthodontic Skeletal Anchorage Methods

Ortodontide İskeletsel Ankraj Yöntemlerinin Risk ve Komplikasyonları

Pages
1259–1266
Publication Date
2012-10-01
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Correct determination of the localization of mini screw can minimalize most of the complications

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The use of skeletal anchorage devices applied to bone eliminates the undesirable effects of the conventional orthodontic methods and reduces the need for patient compliance.
📊
Key Findings & Data:However, some complications may occur during or after the insertion of the mini screws.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Correct determination of the localization of mini screw can minimalize most of the complications
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Ortodontik mini vida · mini plak · komplikasyonlar

Abstract

The use of skeletal anchorage devices applied to bone eliminates the undesirable effects of the conventional orthodontic methods and reduces the need for patient compliance. However, some complications may occur during or after the insertion of the mini screws. Vitality loss of the tooth, osteosclerosis or dentoalveolar ankylosis may be seen as a result of root trauma. Migration of the mini implant, nerve damage, perforation of the nasal cavity or maxillary sinus and mini implant fracture are also among the complications. Correct indication, selecting the suitable mini implant type for the proper location, appropriate insertion and loading protocols are the important considerations in the use of skeletal anchorage devices. Correct determination of the localization of mini screw can minimalize most of the complications

Özet

Kemiğe yerleştirilen iskeletsel ankraj sistemlerinin kullanımı konvansiyonel ortodontik yöntemlerde görülen yan etkileri ortadan kaldırabilmekte ve hasta kooperasyonuna olan ihtiyacı azaltabilmektedir. Bununla birlikte mini vidaların yerleştirilmesi sırasında ve sonrasında bazı komplikasyonlar ortaya çıkabilmektedir. Diş köklerinde travma sonucu dişte vitalite kaybı, osteoskleroz veya dentoalveolar ankiloz oluşabilmektedir. Ayrıca, mini vidada sürüklenme, sinir hasarı, nazal kavite ve maksiller sinüs perforasyonu, mini vidada kırılma gibi komplikasyonlar da gelişebilmektedir. Bu nedenle, klinisyenlerin doğru endikasyon koyarak, uygun lokalizasyonda uygun mini vida ve mini plakları tercih etmeleri, yerleştirme ve yükleme protokollerine uymaları gerekmektedir. Lokalizasyonun doğru belirlenmesi komplikasyonların birçoğunu minimalize edecektir

🔖

Cite This Article

ERTEKİN, B., ESENLİK, E. (2012). Risks and Complications of Orthodontic Skeletal Anchorage Methods. ADO Klinik Bilimler Dergisi, Cilt: 6 - Sayı: 3, 1259–1266. https://ajindex.com/articles/728841

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (14)

  1. Erverdi N., Usumez S., Solak A., Koldas T. Noncompliance open-bite treatment with zygomatic anchorage. Angle Orthod. 77: 986- 990, 2007.
  2. Kuroda S., Sakai Y., Tamamura N., Deguchi T., Takano-Yamamato T. Treatment of severe anterior open bite with skeletal anchorage in adults: Comparison with orthognathic surgery outcomes. Am. J. Orthod. Dentofacial Orthop. 132: 599- 605, 2007.
  3. Singer SL., Henry PJ., Rosenberg I. Osseointegrated implants as an adjunct to facemask therapy: A case report. Angle Orthod. 70: 253-262, 2000.
  4. Enacar A., Giray B., Pehlivanlioglu M., İplikcioğlu H. Facemask therapy with rigid anchorage in a patient with maxillary hypoplasia and severe oligodontia. Am. J. Orthod. Dentofacial Orthop. 123: 571-577, 2003.
  5. De Clerck HJ., Cornelis MA., Cevidanes LH., Heymann GC., Tulloch CJF. Orthopedic traction of the maxilla with miniplates: a new perspective for treatment of midface deficiency. J. Oral Maxillofac. Surg. 67: 2123-2129, 2009. Cope JB. Temporary anchorage devices in orthodontics: A paradigm shift. Semin. Orthod. 11: 3-9, 2005.
  6. Kravitz N., Kusnoto B. Risks and complications of orthodontic miniscrews. Am. J. Orthod. Dentofacial Orthop. 131: 43-51, 2007.
  7. 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. 124: 373-378, 2003.
  8. Ziebura T., Flieger S., Wiechmann D. Mini implants in the palatal slope-a retrospective analysis of implant survival and tissue reaction. Head Face Med. 8: 32-37, 2012.
  9. Sato R., Sato T., Takahashi I., Sugawara J., Takahashi N. Profiling of bacterial flora in crevices around titanium orthodontic anchor plates. Clin. Oral Implants Res. 18: 21-26, 2007.
  10. Lee JS., Kim JK., Park YC., Vanarsdall RL. Application of Orthodontic Mini-Implants. Illinois: Quintessence Publishing Co. Inc., 2007, 55-56.
  11. Trisi P., Rebaudi A. Progressive bone adaptation of titanium implants during and after orthodontic load in humans. Int. J. Periodontics Restorative Dent. 22: 31-43, 2002. Melsen B. Mini Implants? Where are we? J. Clin. Orthod. 39: 539-547, 2005.
  12. Ludwig B., Baumgaertel S., Bowman SJ. Mini Implants in Orthodontics. Illinois: Quintessence Publishing Co. Inc., 2008, 140-141.
  13. Denio D., Torabinejad M., Bakland LK. Anatomical relationship of the mandibular canal to its surrounding structures in mature mandibles. J. Endod. 18: 161-165, 1992.
  14. Torgay A., Aydin E., Cilasun U