A CBCT Assessment of Orthodontic Mini-Implant Placement

A M Ashil; Aseem Sharma; Lijo K Jose; Shubhi Grover; Anuraj Singh Kochar; Shaji T Varghese; Tanushree Sharma; Prabu Mahin Syed Ismail

doi:10.4103/jpbs.jpbs_1102_23

A CBCT Assessment of Orthodontic Mini-Implant Placement

J Pharm Bioallied Sci. 2024 Feb;16(Suppl 1):S927-S929. doi: 10.4103/jpbs.jpbs_1102_23. Epub 2024 Feb 29.

Authors

A M Ashil¹, Aseem Sharma², Lijo K Jose³, Shubhi Grover⁴, Anuraj Singh Kochar⁵, Shaji T Varghese⁶, Tanushree Sharma⁷, Prabu Mahin Syed Ismail⁸

Affiliations

¹ Additional Professor, Department of Orthodontics, Government Dental College, Kannur Pariyaram Medical College, Kerala, India.
² Reader, Department of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, Himachal Institute of Dental Sciences, Paonta Sahib, Himachal Pradesh, India.
³ Professor, Department of Orthodntics, PSM College of Dental Science and Research, Akkikavu, Thrissur, Kerala, India.
⁴ Senior Lecturer, Department of Prosthodntics, Crown and Bridge, Uttaranchal Dental and Medical Research Institute, Dehradun, Uttarakhand, India.
⁵ Department of Orthodontics, Former Consultant Max Hospital, Gugaon, India.
⁶ Professor and HOD, PSM College of Dental Science, Thrissur, Kerala, India.
⁷ Senior Resident, Department of Dentistry, Government Medical College, Kathua, Jammu and Kashmir, India.
⁸ GCD, Pro Positive Health, Assistant Professor, Department of Restorative Dentistry, College of Dentistry in Arrass, Qassim Univesrity, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.

Abstract

Objectives: This study compares the precision of cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) and two-dimensional radiography for mini-implant implantation.

Materials and method: For 30 sites (in 15 patients between the ages of 13 and 26 years), the buccal interradicular region among the 2^nd premolar and 1^st molar was found to be the best location for mini-implants. Next, two groups of the mini-implant implantation process were created. Mini-implants were positioned at the CBCT data-identified sites in the CBCT group. Mini-implants were inserted in the RVG group by using two-dimensional digital radiography and a specially constructed guide. To assess the precision of the mini-implant implantation, post-placement CBCT images were acquired. The obtained data were statistically analyzed.

Result: The two groups showed a statistically considerable variation in the mini-implant placement's departure from the optimal height. Due to the smaller interradicular space and decreased convenience in the posterior mandibular area, two out of 15 mini-implants in the RVG group demonstrated root contact in the mandibular jaw.

Conclusion: The two-dimensional intraoral radiograph of the interradicular area provides sufficient information for mini-implant placement even though CBCT accurately visualizes the interradicular space in three dimensions.

Keywords: Assessment; CBCT; RVG; implant.