Contemporary Clinical Dentistry
   
  Home | About us | Editorial board | Search
Ahead of print | Current Issue | Archives | Advertise
Instructions | Online submission| Contact us | Subscribe |

 

Login  | Users Online: 798  Print this pageEmail this pageSmall font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size 



 
 Table of Contents  
CASE REPORT
Year : 2014  |  Volume : 5  |  Issue : 3  |  Page : 422-424  

Intrusion of an overerupted molar using orthodontic miniscrew implant: A preprosthodontic therapy


1 Department of Prosthodontics and Implantology, Vishnu Dental College, Bhimavaram, Andhra Pradesh, India
2 Department of Orthodontics, Vishnu Dental College, Bhimavaram, Andhra Pradesh, India

Date of Web Publication2-Aug-2014

Correspondence Address:
Indumathi Sivakumar
Department of Prosthodontics and Implantology, Vishnu Dental College, Bhimavaram, Andhra Pradesh
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/0976-237X.137982

Rights and Permissions
   Abstract 

The purpose of this case report is to demonstrate the use of orthodontic miniscrew implant in the intrusion of overerupted molar as a preprosthodontic therapy. A 37-year-old woman with an overerupted maxillary right first molar encroaching on the opposing mandibular edentulous space was successfully intruded using a single miniscrew implant and partial fixed orthodontic appliance. The prosthodontic clinician may adopt this conservative and cost-effective strategy in their routine practice and avoid clinical crown reduction.

Keywords: Adjunctive orthodontics, edentulous space discrepancy, miniscrew, miniscrew implant, molar intrusion, preprosthodontic therapy


How to cite this article:
Sivakumar I, Sivakumar A. Intrusion of an overerupted molar using orthodontic miniscrew implant: A preprosthodontic therapy. Contemp Clin Dent 2014;5:422-4

How to cite this URL:
Sivakumar I, Sivakumar A. Intrusion of an overerupted molar using orthodontic miniscrew implant: A preprosthodontic therapy. Contemp Clin Dent [serial online] 2014 [cited 2019 Sep 18];5:422-4. Available from: http://www.contempclindent.org/text.asp?2014/5/3/422/137982


   Introduction Top


Prosthodontic rehabilitation of edentulous space is often complicated with overeruption of antagonistic tooth and often requires preprosthodontic intervention. In this context, orthodontic intrusion of the overerupted antagonistic tooth to facilitate prosthodontic rehabilitation is a desirable strategy. However, the task is formidable with routine orthodontic mechanics and control of anchorage is difficult. Recently, the introduction of miniscrew implants to the orthodontic armamentarium has widened the scope of intervention. [1],[2],[3] Preprosthodontic intrusion of overerupted tooth with the aid of miniscrew implants is less invasive and simplistic. [4],[5]

Miniscrew implants are made from titanium alloy or surgical grade stainless steel and employ a conical or tapered screw design with asymmetric or symmetric thread pitch. Currently, these screws are manufactured by a number of commercial companies and the screw diameters range from 1.2 to 2.5 mm and the lengths range from 6 to 11 mm. They can be placed directly through the gingival tissue into bone in between the roots of individual teeth with a hand driver or hand piece. Placement is minimally invasive and often completed using only topical anesthetic. Miniscrew implants are unique because unlike restorative endosseous implants they do not require osseointegration. Instead, these devices rely on mechanical retention to maintain rigidity, which also makes their removal relatively simple and noninvasive. Ideally, they should be placed in areas with adequate cortical bone and with the head of the screw in attached alveolar mucosa. They may be loaded immediately, but biomechanical factors must be taken into consideration owing to the increased chance of loosening associated with the lack of integration and torque or rotational forces that may occur under loading. Once they have served their purpose, they are removed. [6]

This case report will focus on preprosthodontic intrusion of an overerupted molar using a single miniscrew implant and partial fixed orthodontic appliance.


   Case Report Top


A 37-year-old woman was seeking restoration of her right posterior occlusion. She presented with full complement of teeth except for mandibular right first molar that was extracted 3 years ago because of decay. As a result, the maxillary right first molar was overerupted and there was insufficient occlusal clearance [Figure 1]. The patient was medically fit and healthy and presented with Class I occlusion and normodivergent facial pattern. Minor maxillary and mandibular crowding was evident. Her gingival health was fairly good. Judging by the marginal ridge discrepancy, the maxillary first molar had overerupted 3 mm occlusally, encroaching upon the antagonistic missing dental space. The objective of the treatment was to intrude the overerupted molar utilizing miniscrew implant anchorage and subsequently regain the appropriate dental space for prosthesis.
Figure 1: Right lateral view of occluded pretreatment cast and intra oral buccal view demonstrating overerupted maxillary right first molar and insufficient occlusal clearance for mandibular prosthesis

Click here to view


The palatal interradicular space between maxillary first molar and second premolar was selected for miniscrew implant insertion. A 1.3 mm by 8 mm miniscrew implant (S.K. Surgicals, Pune, India) was threaded 7 mm from the alveolar crest apically at an angle of about 30°-40° to the dental axis using self-drilling mechanism (finger tightening). Prior to miniscrew placement, a slight purchase point was made by drilling a small pilot hole with a round bur using slow-speed contra-angle hand piece. This facilitated accurate directional control when threading the miniscrew implant into the bone. Sterile saline irrigation and strict antiseptic protocols were followed.

A 0.019 × 0.021 inch titanium-molybdenum alloy (TMA) wire was bent to a "V" shaped attachment with the apex of the "V" formed to a coil to engage elastic thread or coil spring. The free ends of the "V" were bent to conform to the occlusal surface of the molar tooth and bonded with composite. The whole attachment was juxtaposed to the palatal surface of the tooth [Figure 2]a]. An elastic thread (Tp Orthodontics Inc., La Porte, US) of sufficient length was tied between the head of the miniscrew implant and the coil in the "V" attachment to generate mild intrusive force of about 70 g. The calibration was done using dontrix gauge (ETM Corporation, Glendora, Calif). To avoid inadvertent palatal tipping and to favor a synchronous intrusion, a partial orthodontic appliance was fitted buccally to posterior dentition. The appliance set up consisted of a molar tube bonded off centered distally to the upper first molar, an edgewise bracket to first premolar and a 0.017 × 0.025 inch TMA helical spring. The spring was engaged between first molar tube and first premolar bracket and was activated to effect mild intrusive force of approximately 70 g [Figure 2]b]. The first premolar was anchored to the canine and second molar with rigid bonded wires to minimize the counter extrusion and rotation. The elastic thread was later replaced by a nickel titanium (NiTi) push coil spring (Dentaurum, Ispringen, Germany) [Figure 2]c].
Figure 2: Orthodontic appliance set up. (a) Miniscrew implant threaded palatally between maxillary first molar and second premolar and elastic force delivery to the "V" attachment. (b) Activated titanium-molybdenum alloy helical spring. (c) A maxillary right occlusal view showing the full set up in place. First premolar anchored to the canine and second molar with rigid bonded wires to minimize the counter extrusion and rotation

Click here to view


After 5 months of treatment, approximately 2.5 mm of intrusion was achieved. Subsequently, the occlusal clearance was sufficient to rebuild the posterior occlusion by a prosthesis placed in the area of the missing antagonistic tooth. Because the intraoral strap-up was minimized, the patient was able to follow oral hygiene instruction and, furthermore, was pleased with the simplified mechanical devices. Due to financial reasons, the patient had opted for fixed bridge prosthesis. Final occlusion [Figure 3].
Figure 3: After 5 months of treatment, restoration of right posterior occlusion

Click here to view



   Discussion Top


The case exemplified an effective mechanism using a single miniscrew implant to intrude overerupted tooth in patients who seek restorative care. With the advent of miniscrew implants supported intrusion, the need for possible crown reduction as preprosthodontic modality can be eliminated. Furthermore, the current strategy largely avoided the placement of full strap up fixed orthodontic appliances. The set up did drastically reduce the financial burden on the patient as well. The prosthodontic clinician may adopt this conservative and cost-effective strategy in their routine practice.

Molar intrusion is a challenging task, and it is more so in adult patients with restorative concerns. Use of miniscrew implant in preprosthodontic management has drawn great interest in recent years among researchers and clinicians. It is a predictable option with fewer side effects. [4],[5] Recent studies have revealed that the average intrusion of maxillary molars is between 3 and 4 mm and a combination of single miniscrew implant and fixed appliance (partial) is a predictable and effective procedure to achieve maxillary molar intrusion. [4],[7] No definite consensus exists as to where the miniscrew implant should be placed (buccal or palatal) if a single screw is used for maxillary first molar intrusion. The placement of screw in the palatal side mesial to first molar avoids the greater palatine foramen and D4 bone. Placement in D4 bone is not recommended owing to the high failure rate associated with it (35-50%). [8] Another approach is that, it can be placed in the buccal dentoalveolus between the second premolar and first molar at the mucogingival junction and a raised transpalatal arch will effectively counter the buccal tipping of the molar and help in intrusion. [4],[7] A miniscrew implant in the midpalatal area also can provide an effective intrusive force, but it should be combined with a rigid transpalatal bar to prevent the horizontal component of the force tipping the teeth. When tipping occurs the roots invariably move buccally. [9] However, use of two screws on both buccal and palatal sides will effectively produce true intrusion. Nevertheless, on many occasions, the anatomic constraints dictate the placement site and the number of miniscrew implants. It is a prudent decision to minimize the orthodontic armamentarium for any adjunctive procedures favoring reduced financial burden and treatment acceptability by the adult patient. In the present case, the clinical situation demanded placement of a single miniscrew implant in the palatal side and minimal fixed appliance set up on the buccal side to produce an achievable optimum result in the shortest time period possible. The most critical factor for molar intrusion was the point of application of the intrusive force. To direct a force through the center of resistance of a molar, simultaneous buccal and palatal forces should be applied. [9],[10] In the present case, the buccal and palatal forces were generated by the TMA helical spring and the miniscrew implant, respectively. The low load deflection rate of TMA spring and the mild activation of NiTi coil spring provided a balanced force system biomechanically.

Controlling or minimizing the side-effects associated with implant placement, implant stability and counter moments with force application is the main concern. The potential complications include contact with adjacent tooth roots, implant loosening, implant breakage, and damage to anatomic structures. [11] Orthodontic miniscrew implant placement site selection can be effectively managed by astute clinical observation and palpation. Radiographs and surgical three-dimensional guides may be required, although not mandatory for every case. Strictly adhering to the safe zone protocols would suffice for a clean placement. [12] Implant loosening can be attributed to soft-tissue inflammation and improper insertion torque. Achieving primary stability is essential and the implant needs only to be tightened to a torque value of 7-10 Ncm, which is achieved with mild finger tightening. [13]


   Conclusion Top


Intrusion of overerupted molar using miniscrew implant as a preprosthodontic tooth movement is a predictable treatment strategy. Combination of a partial fixed appliance and miniscrew implant may provide a balanced force system for effective intrusion of molar. Miniscrew implant placement site selection and the design of the auxiliary appliance are the critical factors biomechanically.

 
   References Top

1.Kanomi R. Mini-implant for orthodontic anchorage. J Clin Orthod 1997;31:763-7.  Back to cited text no. 1
[PUBMED]    
2.Costa A, Raffainl M, Melsen B. Miniscrews as orthodontic anchorage: A preliminary report. Int J Adult Orthodon Orthognath Surg 1998;13:201-9.  Back to cited text no. 2
    
3.Bae SM, Park HS, Kyung HM, Kwon OW, Sung JH. Clinical application of micro-implant anchorage. J Clin Orthod 2002;36:298-302.  Back to cited text no. 3
    
4.Kravitz ND, Kusnoto B, Tsay TP, Hohlt WF. The use of temporary anchorage devices for molar intrusion. J Am Dent Assoc 2007;138:56-64.  Back to cited text no. 4
    
5.Sohn DS, Lee JK, An KM. Minor tooth movements using microimplant anchorage: Case reports. Implant Dent 2008;17:32-9.  Back to cited text no. 5
    
6.Heymann GC, Tulloch JF. Implantable devices as orthodontic anchorage: A review of current treatment modalities. J Esthet Restor Dent 2006;18:68-79.  Back to cited text no. 6
    
7.Yao CC, Lee JJ, Chen HY, Chang ZC, Chang HF, Chen YJ. Maxillary molar intrusion with fixed appliances and mini-implant anchorage studied in three dimensions. Angle Orthod 2005;75:754-60.  Back to cited text no. 7
    
8.Jaffin RA, Berman CL. The excessive loss of Branemark fixtures in type IV bone: A 5-year analysis. J Periodontol 1991;62:2-4.  Back to cited text no. 8
[PUBMED]    
9.Park HS, Jang BK, Kyung HM. Maxillary molar intrusion with micro-implant anchorage (MIA). Aust Orthod J 2005;21:129-35.  Back to cited text no. 9
    
10.Chun YS, Woo YJ, Row J, Jung EJ. Maxillary molar intrusion with the molar intrusion arch. J Clin Orthod 2000;34:90-3.  Back to cited text no. 10
    
11.Mizrahi E, Mizrahi B. Mini-screw implants (temporary anchorage devices): Orthodontic and pre-prosthetic applications. J Orthod 2007;34:80-94.  Back to cited text no. 11
    
12.Poggio PM, Incorvati C, Velo S, Carano A. "Safe zones": A guide for miniscrew positioning in the maxillary and mandibular arch. Angle Orthod 2006;76:191-7.  Back to cited text no. 12
    
13.Motoyoshi M, Hirabayashi M, Uemura M, Shimizu N. Recommended placement torque when tightening an orthodontic mini-implant. Clin Oral Implants Res 2006;17:109-14.  Back to cited text no. 13
    


    Figures

  [Figure 1], [Figure 2], [Figure 3]



 

Top
 
  Search
 
    Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
    Access Statistics
    Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)  

 
  In this article
    Abstract
   Introduction
   Case Report
   Discussion
   Conclusion
    References
    Article Figures

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed2469    
    Printed32    
    Emailed1    
    PDF Downloaded412    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal