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: 1030  Print this pageEmail this pageSmall font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size 



 
 Table of Contents  
CASE REPORT
Year : 2019  |  Volume : 10  |  Issue : 1  |  Page : 158-160  

Miniscrew implants for intrusion of supraerupted molar: A noninvasive approach for space regaining


Department of Periodontics and Oral Implantology, Institute of Dental Sciences, Siksha O Anusandhan, Bhubaneswar, Odisha, India

Date of Web Publication17-Dec-2019

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Sourav Panda
Department of Periodontics and Oral Implantology, Institute of Dental Sciences, K-8, Kalinga Nagar, Bhubaneswar - 751 003, Odisha
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/ccd.ccd_444_18

Rights and Permissions
   Abstract 

Inadequate interocclusal space often leads to difficulty in prosthetic rehabilitation. Dental implant-indicated sites are governed by various factors which include bone availability, adequate mesiodistal width, and most importantly, adequate interocclusal space for proper prosthetic design on the dental implant. The use of miniscrew implant with coil spring for regaining interocclusal space would be an advantageous procedure for biomechanical intrusion of supraerupted teeth, rather than treating the same with invasive clinical crown reduction/intentional endodontic treatment. This case report describes the use of miniscrew implant with coiled spring on a supraerupted maxillary molar for interocclusal space regaining, to facilitate proper prosthetic rehabilitation in the dental implant site.

Keywords: Edentulous space discrepancy, miniscrew implant, molar intrusion, preprosthetic therapy, temporary anchorage device


How to cite this article:
Purkayastha A, Mohanty R, Panda S, Das U. Miniscrew implants for intrusion of supraerupted molar: A noninvasive approach for space regaining. Contemp Clin Dent 2019;10:158-60

How to cite this URL:
Purkayastha A, Mohanty R, Panda S, Das U. Miniscrew implants for intrusion of supraerupted molar: A noninvasive approach for space regaining. Contemp Clin Dent [serial online] 2019 [cited 2020 Jan 17];10:158-60. Available from: http://www.contempclindent.org/text.asp?2019/10/1/158/273158


   Introduction Top


Dental implant therapy has taken over conventional fixed dental prosthesis as an alternative treatment modality for the last few decades. The predictability, success, and esthetics are better when compared to conventional fixed dental prosthesis. The long-term success of a dental implant however depends on an accurate diagnosis and proper treatment planning, which includes clinical and radiological examination for evaluating maxilla-mandibular relationship, available mesiodistal width, and interocclusal space.

Diagnostic assessment of available interocclusal space is of prime importance in the treatment planning, implant selection, and prosthesis design before the surgical placement of dental implant. At least 6 mm of interocclusal space is required when measured from the shoulder of the implant to the occlusal surface of the opposing tooth.[1]

Inadequate or improper evaluation of the available interocclusal space will result in an esthetically and functionally compromised prosthesis and patient dissatisfaction. Therefore, adequate interocclusal height is an important criterion for a successful implant restoration therapy.[2]

Long-term edentulism often results in supraeruption of the opposing tooth which leads to occlusal interference, functional disturbances, compromised periodontal health, and difficulty in placement of prosthesis.

Increasing the interocclusal space requires invasive prosthodontics reduction with intentional endodontic therapy, surgical intervention, or demanding orthodontic therapy.

Hence, a minimally invasive technique using temporary anchorage device like miniscrew implant with coil spring, for the intrusion of the opposing tooth, overcomes the conventional technique of tooth reduction/intentional endodontic therapy, thereby regaining appropriate interocclusal space for implant-supported prosthesis on the antagonist tooth.


   Case Report Top


A 32-year-old male patient reported to the Department of Periodontics and Oral Implantology, Institute of Dental Science, Bhubaneswar, for the replacement of his missing tooth in the right lower jaw. On examination, the patient presented with an infected root stump in relation to 46. Further, due to the long-term edentulism and supraeruption of 16, the region was found to have compromised interocclusal space for prosthetic restoration [Figure 1]. The orthopantomograph suggests the area of edentulism with root stumps #46 with availability of sufficient bone height for implant placement in relation to 46 [Figure 2]. Accordingly, the treatment plan aimed at removal of root stump followed by immediate implant placement with the delayed loading in relation to 46 after regaining of interocclusal space. The patient was informed about the detailed procedure and consent was taken.
Figure 1: Preoperative photograph – clinical view

Click here to view
Figure 2: Preoperative – orthopantomographic view

Click here to view


The patient was administered with a dose of 2% lignocaine HCl with 1:200000 adrenaline for adequate local anesthesia. Miniscrew implant, sized 1.5 mm × 9 mm length (S. K. Surgical, Pune, India), was placed using self-tapping mechanism by use of a hand screwdriver after positioning a pilot osteotome, with a slow speed micromotor round bur at 45°–90° angulation to the long axis of the tooth. Two miniscrew implants were placed both in the buccal and in the palatal aspect, exactly in the interdental region between 15 and 16, respectively. A Ni-Ti coil spring was passed through the occlusal surface of the maxillary first molar and both free ends of the coil spring were anchored to the mini-implant on the either side, thereby delivering a mild, continuous intrusive force of about 50 g to 70 g[3] till the supraeruption was corrected, up to a period of 6 months [Figure 3]. One month post-miniscrew implant placement, the replacement of 46 was planned by immediate implant placement following extraction of root stump in relation to 46. An implant sized 4.5 mm × 13 mm (Myriad Plus implant system, Equinox Medical Technologies, Netherlands) was placed after the atraumatic extraction of root stump in relation to 46 [Figure 4].
Figure 3: Miniscrew implant placement; (a) buccal view, (b) occlusal view, (c) post-6 months miniscrew implant placement, (d) intraoral periapical post-6 months miniscrew implant placement, suggesting no periapical pathology

Click here to view
Figure 4: Dental implant placement in relation to 46

Click here to view


After a follow-up of 6 months, an adequate intrusion was achieved for the supraerupted #16. Radiographically, there was no periapical radiolucency #16. The interocclusal space was reevaluated and found to be ~5 mm, which was adequate for the prosthetic rehabilitation of the dental implant #46 [Figure 5]. The implant site was then restored with a prosthetic crown of adequate height and esthetics.
Figure 5: Postoperative view suggesting proper restoration after space regaining by miniscrew implant placement

Click here to view



   Discussion Top


This case demonstrates an effective mechanism for the intrusion of the overerupted tooth using an interdisciplinary approach in cases seeking restorative care without crown reduction. With the help of the miniscrew implant-supported intrusion, the need for the possible crown reduction and endodontic treatment of the antagonist tooth as preprosthodontic modality could be avoided.

In recent years, the use of miniscrew implant before prosthodontics management has gained a great interest. The use of the miniscrew implant is associated with few complications.[4],[5] The potential complication related to the mini-implant includes contact with adjacent tooth root, implant breakage, implant loosening, and damage to the anatomic structures involved.

In this case, two miniscrew implants were placed, one buccally and other palatally to achieve an intrusion of the maxillary molar. Simultaneous buccal and palatal force should be applied on the coiled spring to direct the intrusive force toward the center of resistance.[5],[6]

Both miniscrew implants were placed at an angulation of 45°–90° to the occlusal plane in the interdental region. It is believed that the oblique angulation of miniscrew implant placement reduces the risk of adjacent root perforation.[7] SLOB technique was employed to detect any risk of adjacent root perforation.

The important factor for delivering a mild, continuous intrusive force is governed by the primary initial stability of these implants. These implants need to be screwed at a torque of at least 7–10 N·cm to withstand uprootment or loosening while delivering intrusive force.[8],[9]


   Conclusion Top


The evaluation of interocclusal space before implant placement is very vital when treatment options are being considered. Among the several treatment options, miniscrew implants serve the purpose in a noninvasive manner. Therefore, miniscrew implants serve to be an effective procedure for increasing the interocclusal space by intruding supraerupted antagonist, to help fabricate a functionally esthetic prosthetic restoration.

Declaration of patient consent

The authors certify that they have obtained all appropriate patient consent forms. In the form the patient(s) has/have given his/her/their consent for his/her/their images and other clinical information to be reported in the journal. The patients understand that their names and initials will not be published and due efforts will be made to conceal their identity, but anonymity cannot be guaranteed.

Financial support and sponsorship

Nil.

Conflicts of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.

 
   References Top

1.
Misch CE. Contemporary Implant Dentistry. 3rd ed. St. Louis: Mosby-Elsevier, 2008.  Back to cited text no. 1
    
2.
Chaimattayompol N, Arbree NS. Assessing the space limitation inside a complete denture for implant attachments. J Prosthet Dent 2003;89:82-5.  Back to cited text no. 2
    
3.
Quinn RS, Yoshikawa DK. A reassessment of force magnitude in orthodontics. Am J Orthod 1985;88:252-60.  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.
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. 6
    
7.
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. 7
    
8.
Carano A, Velo S, Leone P, Siciliani G. Clinical applications of the miniscrew anchorage system. J Clin Orthod 2005;39:9-24.  Back to cited text no. 8
    
9.
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. 9
    


    Figures

  [Figure 1], [Figure 2], [Figure 3], [Figure 4], [Figure 5]



 

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
    Viewed68    
    Printed0    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded26    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal