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
. 2014 Apr 1;15(1):29.
doi: 10.1186/s40510-014-0029-x.

Temporary anchorage device usage: a survey among Swiss orthodontists

Goran Markic, Christos Katsaros, Nikolaos Pandis, Theodore Eliades  1
Affiliations

Temporary anchorage device usage: a survey among Swiss orthodontists

Goran Markic et al. Prog Orthod. .

Abstract

Background: The aim of the survey was to obtain information on the treatment plan preferences, mechanics and characteristics of temporary anchorage device (TAD) application using a single case presented to orthodontists in Switzerland.

Methods: A structured questionnaire to be completed by all study participants with case-specific (treatment plan including mechanics and TAD usage) and general questions (general fixed appliance and TAD usage as well as professional, educational and demographic questions) together with an orthodontic borderline case was utilised. The case was a female adult with dental Class II/2, deep bite and maxillary anterior crowing, who had been treated in childhood with extraction of four premolars and fixed appliance followed by wisdom tooth extraction.

Results: The response rate was 24.4% (108 out of 443). The majority (96.3%, 104) proposed comprehensive treatment, while 3.7% (4) planned only alignment of maxillary teeth. 8.3% (9) included a surgical approach in their treatment plan. An additional 0.9% (1) combined the surgical approach with Class II mechanics. 75.1% (81) decided on distalization on the maxilla using TADs, 7.4% (8) planned various types of Class II appliances and 3.7% (4) combined distalization using TADs or headgear with Class II appliances and surgery. Palatal implants were the most popular choice (70.6%, 60), followed by mini-screws (22.4%, 19) and mini-plates on the infrazygomatic crests (7.0%, 6). The preferred site of TAD insertion showed more variation in sagittal than in transversal dimension, and the median size of mini-screws used was 10.0-mm long (interquartile range (IQR) 2.3 mm) and 2.0-mm wide (IQR 0.3 mm).

Conclusions: Distalization against palatal implants and then distalization against mini-screws were the most popular treatment plans. Preferred site for TAD insertion varied depending on type and size but varied more widely in the sagittal than in the transversal dimension.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Pretreatment intra-oral photographs.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Pretreatment OPG.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Pretreatment lateral cephalogram and its tracing with the most common measurements.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Interactive application for TAD placement. One example of the occlusal view of the upper jaw with one palatal implant and two mini-screws.
Figure 5
Figure 5
Scattergram of distribution of palatal implants (black circles) and mini-screws (green circles). Reference point for the measurements (black cross) defined by the incisal edge and raphe palatina mediana. Centroids of palatal implants (red cross) and left, right and centre groups of mini-screws (white crosses). Borderlines between mini-screw groups are delimited with yellow dashed lines.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Schatzle M, Mannchen R, Zwahlen M, Lang NP. Survival and failure rates of orthodontic temporary anchorage devices: a systematic review. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2009;15(12):1351–9. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2009.01754.x. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Ruf S, Pancherz H. Dentoskeletal effects and facial profile changes in young adults treated with the Herbst appliance. Angle Orthod. 1999;15(3):239–46. - PubMed
    1. Ruf S, Pancherz H. Orthognathic surgery and dentofacial orthopedics in adult Class II Division 1 treatment: mandibular sagittal split osteotomy versus Herbst appliance. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2004;15(2):140–52. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2004.02.011. quiz 254–5. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Bock NC, Ruf S. Dentoskeletal changes in adult Class II division 1 Herbst treatment—how much is left after the retention period? Eur J Orthod. 2012;15(6):747–53. doi: 10.1093/ejo/cjr087. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Cassidy DW Jr, Herbosa EG, Rotskoff KS, Johnston LE Jr. A comparison of surgery and orthodontics in “borderline” adults with Class II, division 1 malocclusions. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1993;15(5):455–70. doi: 10.1016/0889-5406(93)70072-V. - DOI - PubMed

MeSH terms