Sahoo Sanjay Kumar, Chekka Manjunath, Chawla Riddhi, Nehal Naimatullah Mohammed, Kumar Misra K, Kandikatla Pradeep, Prashant M C
Department of Periodontics, Kalinga Institute of Dental Sciences, KIIT Deemed to be University, Bhubaneswar, Odisha, India.
Professor and HOD, Department of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopaedics, Tirumala Dental College, Bardipur, Nizamabad, Telengana, India.
J Pharm Bioallied Sci. 2024 Jul;16(Suppl 3):S2458-S2460. doi: 10.4103/jpbs.jpbs_310_24. Epub 2024 Jul 31.
In order to obtain satisfactory treatment outcomes, orthodontic space closure frequently requires trustworthy anchoring devices. Because they are easier to install and smaller than regular implants, mini-implants have become a viable option. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of regular implants versus mini-implants as orthodontic anchoring devices for closing gaps in a tertiary care context.
A total of 100 patients who needed space closure were split into two groups at random and given regular implants (group B, n = 50) or mini-implants (group A, n = 50). The rate of space closure, anchoring loss, and patient pain were measured using visual analog scales as the primary end measures. Resonance frequency analysis was used to assess implant stability. Based on implant survival and the lack of peri-implant problems, success rates were calculated.
Mini-implants showed much lower rates of patient pain ( < 0.001) and anchoring loss ( < 0.05) than normal implants; however, they did show comparable rates of space closure ( = 0.42). In addition, mini-implants had comparable success rates ( = 0.78) and greater implant stability ( < 0.01) when compared to normal implants.
In conclusion, mini-implants have benefits in anchorage preservation, patient comfort, and implant stability over regular implants when used as orthodontic anchoring devices for space closure. They also offer equivalent effectiveness. These results provide credence to the use of mini-implants as practical substitutes in orthodontic practice.
为了获得满意的治疗效果，正畸间隙关闭通常需要可靠的锚固装置。由于微型种植体比常规种植体更容易安装且体积更小，因此已成为一种可行的选择。本研究的目的是在三级医疗环境中评估常规种植体与微型种植体作为正畸锚固装置关闭间隙的有效性。
总共100名需要关闭间隙的患者被随机分为两组，分别植入常规种植体（B组，n = 50）或微型种植体（A组，n = 50）。使用视觉模拟量表测量间隙关闭率、锚固丧失率和患者疼痛程度作为主要结局指标。采用共振频率分析评估种植体稳定性。根据种植体存留情况和种植体周围无问题来计算成功率。
微型种植体的患者疼痛率（< 0.001）和锚固丧失率（< 0.05）远低于常规种植体；然而，它们的间隙关闭率相当（= 0.42）。此外，与常规种植体相比，微型种植体的成功率相当（= 0.78）且种植体稳定性更高（< 0.01）。
总之，当用作正畸间隙关闭的锚固装置时，微型种植体在锚固保留、患者舒适度和种植体稳定性方面比常规种植体更具优势。它们还具有同等的有效性。这些结果为微型种植体在正畸实践中作为实用替代品的使用提供了依据。
