Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2008 Jul;66(7):1439-45.
doi: 10.1016/j.joms.2008.01.037.

Modified miniplates for temporary skeletal anchorage in orthodontics: placement and removal surgeries

Marie A Cornelis  1 , Nicole R Scheffler, Pierre Mahy, Sergio Siciliano, Hugo J De Clerck, J F Camilla Tulloch
Affiliations

Modified miniplates for temporary skeletal anchorage in orthodontics: placement and removal surgeries

Marie A Cornelis et al. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2008 Jul.

Abstract

Purpose: Skeletal anchorage systems are increasingly used in orthodontics. This article describes the techniques of placement and removal of modified surgical miniplates used for temporary orthodontic anchorage and reports surgeons' perceptions of their use.

Patients and methods: We enrolled 97 consecutive orthodontic patients having miniplates placed as an adjunct to treatment. A total of 200 miniplates were placed by 9 oral surgeons. Patients and surgeons completed questionnaires after placement and removal surgeries.

Results: Fifteen miniplates needed to be removed prematurely. Antibiotics and anti-inflammatories were generally prescribed after placement but not after removal surgery. Most surgeries were performed with the patient under local anesthesia. Placement surgery lasted on average between 15 and 30 minutes per plate and was considered by the surgeons to be very easy to moderately easy. The surgery to remove the miniplates was considered easier and took less time. The patients' chief complaint was swelling, lasting on average 5.3 +/- 2.8 days after placement and 4.5 +/- 2.6 days after removal.

Conclusions: Although miniplate placement/removal surgery requires the elevation of a flap, this was considered an easy and relatively short surgical procedure that can typically be performed with the patient under local anesthesia without complications, and it may be considered a safe and effective adjunct for orthodontic treatment.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

FIGURE 1
FIGURE 1
Miniplate with connection bar coming through gums at mucogingival junction. The attachment unit, located close to the dental arch, serves as anchorage to move the premolars and molars to the distal with a coil spring.
FIGURE 2
FIGURE 2
Miniplates: Maxillary (A) and mandibular (B) Bollard device and C-tube (C).
FIGURE 3
FIGURE 3
Placement surgery in maxilla and mandible: L-shaped incisions with horizontal part of the incision being 1 mm into attached gingiva (A), mucoperiosteal flap (B), drilling of middle hole (for 3-hole plates) or hole located closest to attachment unit (for 2-hole plates) (C), insertion of screws (D), and closure with resorbable sutures (E). F, Bollard device with attachment units facing anterior in posterior maxilla and posterior in anterior mandible.
FIGURE 4
FIGURE 4
Schematic cross section through miniplate placed on infrazygomatic crest. The connection bar is slightly bent at the lower limit of the plate (arrow a) to ensure tight contact between the end of the connecting bar and the bony surface at the emergence point through the mucosa (arrow b).
FIGURE 5
FIGURE 5
A, Swelling reported by patients. B, Surgeons’ perceptions of surgical complexity: Frequencies for both placement and removal surgeries.
FIGURE 6
FIGURE 6
Evaluation of TSADs at removal surgery. Frequencies for mobility of miniplate, bone overlying plates, inflammatory tissue, and resistance of screws.
FIGURE 7
FIGURE 7
Bollard device’s attachment unit with slots for insertion of wires, allowing displacement of the point of application of the force distally in this case.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Willems G, Carels CE, Naert IE, et al. Interdisciplinary treatment planning for orthodontic-prosthetic implant anchorage in a partially edentulous patient. Clin Oral Implants Res. 1999;10:331. - PubMed
    1. Roberts WE, Marshall KJ, Mozsary PG. Rigid endosseous implant utilized as anchorage to protract molars and close an atrophic extraction site. Angle Orthod. 1990;60:135. - PubMed
    1. Wehrbein H, Feifel H, Diedrich P. Palatal implant anchorage reinforcement of posterior teeth: A prospective study. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1999;116:678. - PubMed
    1. Cornelis MA, Scheffler NR, De Clerck HJ, et al. Systematic review of the experimental use of temporary skeletal anchorage devices in orthodontics. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2007;131:S52. - PubMed
    1. Costa A, Raffaini M, Melsen B. Miniscrews as orthodontic anchorage: A preliminary report. Int J Adult Orthodon Orthognath Surg. 1998;13:201. - PubMed

Publication types