Comparison of the intrusive effects of miniscrewsand utility arches – Based on Polat-Ozsoy et al., AJODO 2011

ParameterMiniscrew MechanicsUtility Arch
Indication in studyDeep bite ≥4 mm + excessive gingival display + normal vertical dimensionsSame
PatientsPostpubertal; mean age 20.9 yrsMean age 15.25 yrs
Appliance4 maxillary incisors bonded4 maxillary incisors + maxillary first molars banded
Initial leveling0.016″ and 0.016 × 0.022″ NiTiPassive preformed NiTi utility arch
Working wire0.016 × 0.022″ SS anterior segment0.016 × 0.016″ blue Elgiloy
Miniscrew positionDistal to maxillary lateral incisors
Miniscrew size1.2 mm × 6 mm
Loading1 week after placement
Intrusion force80 g
Force applicationClose to center of resistanceThrough utility arch
Treatment duration6.61 ± 2.95 months6.61 ± 2.46 months
Intrusion rate0.44 mm/month0.27 mm/month
Incisor vertical movement2.97 mm1.81 mm
True intrusion at CR1.75 mm0.86 mm
Incisor protrusion0.79 mm — NS3.91 mm — significant
Incisor angular change3.85° — NS13.55° — significant
Molar movementNo significant movementDistal tipping
Overbite reduction2.18 mm2.32 mm
Root resorptionNo signs detected in miniscrew groupNot evaluated in this study
Main advantageTrue intrusion + minimal protrusion + minimal posterior side effectsEffective overbite correction but greater incisor proclination and molar tipping

Leave a comment