John Libbey Eurotext

L'Orthodontie Française

MENU

Biomechanics of mini-implants : analysis of the adverse effects of four clinical situations and proposed resolutions Volume 92, issue 2, Juin 2021

Figures

  • Figure 1
  • Figure 2
  • Figure 3
  • Figure 4
  • Figure 5
  • Figure 6
  • Figure 7
  • Figure 8
  • Figure 9
  • Figure 10
  • Figure 11
  • Figure 12
  • Figure 13
  • Figure 14
  • Figure 15
  • Figure 16
  • Figure 17
  • Figure 18
  • Figure 19
  • Figure 20
  • Figure 21
  • Figure 22
  • Figure 23
  • Figure 24
  • Figure 25
  • Figure 26

Tables

Authors
1 Unité Fonctionnelle d’Orthopédie Dento-Faciale, Centre de Traitements Dentaires, Hospices Civils de Lyon, 6-8 place Depéret, 69365 Lyon cedex 03, France
2 Faculté d’Odontologie, Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1, 11 rue Guillaume Paradin, 69372 Lyon Cedex 08, France
* Correspondance

Introduction

The biomechanical adverse effects generated by our treatments must be considered among the failures of mini-implants, certainly excellent means of anchorage. The aim of this article was to illustrate and comment on mechanical adverse effects and to propose solutions.

Material and Method

Four common clinical situations in vestibular technique are analyzed, decomposed three-dimensionally and solved.

Results

Maxillary incisor intrusion in direct traction (mini-implant between lateral incisors and canines in direct anchorage) can lead to a disto-labial rotation of the supporting teeth and an incisor flaring. Maxillary incisivo-canine retraction (mini-implant between 5 and 6 in direct anchorage) leads to a canine rotation, a clockwise rotation of the occlusal plane and a version of the adjacent teeth. The maxillary molar two-steps distalization (mini-implant between 5 and 6 with metal ligation to the canine) causes a rotation of the adjacent to the spring teeth, an incisor flaring and a molar disto-version. The protraction of a mandibular molar (mini-implant between 3 and 4 in direct anchorage) causes a disto-labial rotation, a lingual torque and a mesio-version of the molar as well as an incisor flaring and a clockwise rotation of the occlusal plan. The compensation bends on the adjacent teeth, the choice of the location and the type of mini-implant, the use of a power arms to get closer to the center of resistance are among the means of resolution.

Conclusion

If mini-implants anchorage allows a significant quantitative effect, adverse effects should be considered individually with a three-dimensional biomechanical analysis.