Results : Efficacy of orthodontic mini implants for en masse retraction in the maxilla: a systematic review and meta-analysis [4]
The overall success rates of the orthodontic mini implants varied among the studies. A success rate of 95.7% with a loss of 2 from 46 implants was reported by Upadhyay et al. [48], and the implants could be replaced immediately. Two patients developed a peri-implant inflammation which was resolved through improved oral hygiene. A loss of 5 of 72 implants was reported by Upadhyay et al. [49], and in 2 patients, treatment was discontinued due to inflammation, which was resolved through improved oral hygiene. Davoody et al. [11] observed a success rate of 84% (5 of 30 implants), and Basha et al. [4] reported a success rate of 71.4%. In their study, 4 of 14 implants became loose during treatment but could be replaced subsequently. In further 4 patients, treatment was discontinued due to inflammation, which was resolved through improvement of oral hygiene. A success rate of 96% with a loss of 2 from 50 implants in the upper alveolar ridge due to peri-implant inflammation was observed by Chopra et al. [9], who employed indirect anchorage in the alveolar ridge. Similar values were reported by Benson et al. [5], who employed indirect anchorage through a mini implant in the mid-palate. In their study, in 6 of 24 patients, the implant failed to reach primary stability. In 4 patients, the implant had to be replaced during treatment, and in 2 patients, treatment was compromised due to implant failure. All implant failures occurred among the first implants placed by the surgeon, and no implant loss was observed for implants with sufficient primary stability.
A success rate of 100% with no signs of implant mobility, inflammation, or loss were observed in two studies [54, 57] in which indirect anchorage through mid-palatal implants was employed.
Summarizing these findings, implant loss was observed at 8 of 93 implants (8.6%) in the indirect anchorage group. In the direct anchorage groups, implant loss was reported for 16 of 162 implants (9.9%).
Serial posts:
- Abstract : Efficacy of orthodontic mini implants for en masse retraction in the maxilla: a systematic review and meta-analysis
- Review : Efficacy of orthodontic mini implants for en masse retraction in the maxilla: a systematic review and meta-analysis
- Methods : Efficacy of orthodontic mini implants for en masse retraction in the maxilla: a systematic review and meta-analysis [1]
- Methods : Efficacy of orthodontic mini implants for en masse retraction in the maxilla: a systematic review and meta-analysis [2]
- Methods : Efficacy of orthodontic mini implants for en masse retraction in the maxilla: a systematic review and meta-analysis [3]
- Methods : Efficacy of orthodontic mini implants for en masse retraction in the maxilla: a systematic review and meta-analysis [4]
- Results : Efficacy of orthodontic mini implants for en masse retraction in the maxilla: a systematic review and meta-analysis [1]
- Results : Efficacy of orthodontic mini implants for en masse retraction in the maxilla: a systematic review and meta-analysis [2]
- Results : Efficacy of orthodontic mini implants for en masse retraction in the maxilla: a systematic review and meta-analysis [3]
- Results : Efficacy of orthodontic mini implants for en masse retraction in the maxilla: a systematic review and meta-analysis [4]
- Results : Efficacy of orthodontic mini implants for en masse retraction in the maxilla: a systematic review and meta-analysis [5]
- Discussion : Efficacy of orthodontic mini implants for en masse retraction in the maxilla: a systematic review and meta-analysis [1]
- Discussion : Efficacy of orthodontic mini implants for en masse retraction in the maxilla: a systematic review and meta-analysis [2]
- Conclusions : Efficacy of orthodontic mini implants for en masse retraction in the maxilla: a systematic review and meta-analysis
- References : Efficacy of orthodontic mini implants for en masse retraction in the maxilla: a systematic review and meta-analysis [1]
- References : Efficacy of orthodontic mini implants for en masse retraction in the maxilla: a systematic review and meta-analysis [2]
- References : Efficacy of orthodontic mini implants for en masse retraction in the maxilla: a systematic review and meta-analysis [3]
- References : Efficacy of orthodontic mini implants for en masse retraction in the maxilla: a systematic review and meta-analysis [4]
- References : Efficacy of orthodontic mini implants for en masse retraction in the maxilla: a systematic review and meta-analysis [5]
- References : Efficacy of orthodontic mini implants for en masse retraction in the maxilla: a systematic review and meta-analysis [6]
- Acknowledgements : Efficacy of orthodontic mini implants for en masse retraction in the maxilla: a systematic review and meta-analysis
- Author information : Efficacy of orthodontic mini implants for en masse retraction in the maxilla: a systematic review and meta-analysis [1]
- Author information : Efficacy of orthodontic mini implants for en masse retraction in the maxilla: a systematic review and meta-analysis [2]
- Ethics declarations : Efficacy of orthodontic mini implants for en masse retraction in the maxilla: a systematic review and meta-analysis
- Additional file : Efficacy of orthodontic mini implants for en masse retraction in the maxilla: a systematic review and meta-analysis
- Rights and permissions : Efficacy of orthodontic mini implants for en masse retraction in the maxilla: a systematic review and meta-analysis
- About this article : Efficacy of orthodontic mini implants for en masse retraction in the maxilla: a systematic review and meta-analysis
- Table 1 List of excluded studies (with reason) (Of: Efficacy of orthodontic mini implant)
- Table 2 Characteristics of the included studies (TPA transpalatal arch, RCT randomized controlled clinical trial, CCT controlled clinical trial) (Of: Efficacy of orthodontic mini implant)
- Table 3 Risk of bias judgment according to the Cochrane Collaboration (Of: Efficacy of orthodontic mini implant)
- Fig. 1. PRISMA study flow diagram : Efficacy of orthodontic mini implant
- Fig. 2. Graphic visualization of the risk of bias judgements : Efficacy of orthodontic mini implant
- Fig. 3. Forest plot for anchorage loss in the horizontal dimension : Efficacy of orthodontic mini implant
- Fig. 4. Forest plot for anchorage loss in the vertical dimension : Efficacy of orthodontic mini implant
- Fig. 5. Funnel plot for anchorage loss in the horizontal dimension (MD mean difference, SE standard error) : Efficacy of orthodontic mini implant
- Fig. 6. Funnel plot for anchorage loss in the vertical dimension (MD mean difference, SE standard error) : Efficacy of orthodontic mini implant