Data sourcesMedline, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Embase, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) and SIGLE.Study selectionRandomised controlled trials(RCTs), clinical controlled trials (CCTs) and cohort studies that assessed the success/failure rates of self-drilling and self-tapping mini-screws for orthodontic anchorage were considered.Data extraction and synthesisData was abstracted and assessed for quality by two reviewers independently. The Newcastle-Ottawa scale (NOS) was used to evaluate the methodological quality. Meta-analyses with subgroup analysis of different study designs, follow-up periods, participant age and immediate loading or delayed loading were conducted.ResultsThree CCTs and three cohort studies were included. These were assessed to be of high quality. Meta-analysis (six studies) showed no difference in success rates between the two types of screws; odds ratio (OR) = 0.90 (95%CI; 0.52-1.53). Meta-analysis (two studies) found no difference in the rate of root contact between the two systems; OR = 0.96 (95% CI; 0.53-1.71).ConclusionsCurrently available clinical evidence suggests that the success rates of self-tapping and self-drilling miniscrews are similar. Determination of the position and direction of placement should be more precise when self-drilling miniscrews are used in sites with narrow root proximity.

No confidence that success rates of self-drilling and self-tapping insertion techniques of orthodontic mini-implants are similar / R. Reint Meursinge, G. Cacciatore. - In: EVIDENCE-BASED DENTISTRY. - ISSN 1462-0049. - 17:4(2016 Nov), pp. 111-113. [10.1038/sj.ebd.6401203]

No confidence that success rates of self-drilling and self-tapping insertion techniques of orthodontic mini-implants are similar

G. Cacciatore
Ultimo
2016

Abstract

Data sourcesMedline, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Embase, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) and SIGLE.Study selectionRandomised controlled trials(RCTs), clinical controlled trials (CCTs) and cohort studies that assessed the success/failure rates of self-drilling and self-tapping mini-screws for orthodontic anchorage were considered.Data extraction and synthesisData was abstracted and assessed for quality by two reviewers independently. The Newcastle-Ottawa scale (NOS) was used to evaluate the methodological quality. Meta-analyses with subgroup analysis of different study designs, follow-up periods, participant age and immediate loading or delayed loading were conducted.ResultsThree CCTs and three cohort studies were included. These were assessed to be of high quality. Meta-analysis (six studies) showed no difference in success rates between the two types of screws; odds ratio (OR) = 0.90 (95%CI; 0.52-1.53). Meta-analysis (two studies) found no difference in the rate of root contact between the two systems; OR = 0.96 (95% CI; 0.53-1.71).ConclusionsCurrently available clinical evidence suggests that the success rates of self-tapping and self-drilling miniscrews are similar. Determination of the position and direction of placement should be more precise when self-drilling miniscrews are used in sites with narrow root proximity.
Bone Screws; Humans; Miniaturization; Tooth Root; Dental Implants; Orthodontic Anchorage Procedures; Dentistry (all)
Settore MED/28 - Malattie Odontostomatologiche
nov-2016
Article (author)
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
2016 Reynders (No confidence that success rates of self-drilling and self-tapping insertion techniques of orthodontic mini-implants are similar).pdf

accesso riservato

Tipologia: Publisher's version/PDF
Dimensione 226.76 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
226.76 kB Adobe PDF   Visualizza/Apri   Richiedi una copia
Pubblicazioni consigliate

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/2434/540803
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 0
  • Scopus 1
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? ND
social impact