Browse

Success rate and risk factors associated with mini-implants reinstalled in the Maxilla

DC Field Value Language
dc.contributor.authorBaek, Seung-Hak-
dc.contributor.authorKim, Bo-Mi-
dc.contributor.authorKyung, Seung-Hyun-
dc.contributor.authorLim, Joong Ki-
dc.contributor.authorKim, Young Ho-
dc.date.accessioned2013-01-22T08:08:56Z-
dc.date.available2013-01-22T08:08:56Z-
dc.date.issued2008-
dc.identifier.citationAngle Orthodontist, Vol.78, No.5, pp.895-901ko_KR
dc.identifier.issn0003-3219-
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10371/80987-
dc.description.abstractObjective: To determine the difference in the success rate for two types of oral installed mini-implants (OMIs): one type of initially installed OMI and a new implant of the same type that is reinstalled. Materials and Methods: The subjects consisted of 58 patients (19 male, 39 female; mean age = 21.78 ± 5.85 years) who had received at least one OMI (self-drilling type, conical shape with 2.0-mm upper diameter and 5-mm length) in the attached gingiva of the upper buccal posterior regions for maximum anchorage during en masse retraction. If an OMI failed, a new one was immediately installed in the same area after 4 to 6 weeks or in an adjacent area immediately. The total number of initially installed OMIs (II-OMI) was 109 and the total number of reinstalled OMIs (RI-OMI) was 34. Statistical analysis was performed using ?2 test, Kaplan-Meier method, log-rank test, and Cox proportional hazards regression model. Results: The success rate and mean duration were 75.2% and 10.0 months, respectively, for II-OMI and 66.7% and 6.4 months, respectively, for RI-OMI. Age, vertical skeletal pattern, and site and side of implantation were not related to the success rates of ll-OMI and RI-OMI. Log-rank test showed that ll-OMI in males and Class III malocclusions were more prone to failure. The relative risk of ll-OMI failure in Class III malocclusions as opposed to Class I malocclusions was 5.36 (95% confidence interval, 2.008 to 14.31, P = .001). Conclusion: The success rate of the ll-OMI was not statistically different from that of the RI-OMI. Sex and ANB angle might be more important factors for better ll-OMI results. (C) 2008 by The EH Angle Education and Research Foundation, Inc.ko_KR
dc.language.isoenko_KR
dc.publisherEH Angle Education and Research Foundationko_KR
dc.subjectOrthodontic mini-implantko_KR
dc.subjectSuccess rateko_KR
dc.subjectReinstallationko_KR
dc.subjectRisk factorko_KR
dc.titleSuccess rate and risk factors associated with mini-implants reinstalled in the Maxillako_KR
dc.typeArticleko_KR
dc.contributor.AlternativeAuthor백승학-
dc.contributor.AlternativeAuthor김보미-
dc.contributor.AlternativeAuthor경승현-
dc.contributor.AlternativeAuthor임중기-
dc.contributor.AlternativeAuthor김영호-
dc.identifier.doi10.2319/091207-430.1-
dc.citation.journaltitleAngle Orthodontist-
dc.description.tc12-
Appears in Collections:
College of Dentistry/School of Dentistry (치과대학/치의학대학원)Dept. of Dentistry (치의학과)Journal Papers (저널논문_치의학과)
Files in This Item:
  • mendeley

Items in S-Space are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

Browse