Interradicular trabecular bone density of the lateral maxilla for temporary anchorage devices – a histomorphometric study

Head & Face Medicine

Heinrich Wehrbein¹  Elena Krieger¹ 

[1] Department of Orthodontics, Medical Centre of the Johannes-Gutenberg-University Mainz, Augustusplatz 2, Mainz, 55131, Germany

关键词: Bone density;    Failure rate;    Insertion site;    Implant;    Anchorage;    Orthodontic;   

Others  :  1135913
DOI  :  10.1186/s13005-015-0058-9

 received in 2014-09-24, accepted in 2015-01-13,  发布年份 2015

【 摘 要 】

Objective

To analyze the interradicular trabecular bone density of the lateral maxilla regarding the insertion of temporary anchorage devices (TADs).

Material and methods

The material consisted of tissue blocks of autopsy material from 20 subjects (17 male, 3 female, 16 - 63y). The specimens comprised the dentated alveolar bone of the lateral maxilla. The interradicular areas (IRA) from canine to distally of the second molar (IRA 3–4, 4–5, 5–6, 6–7, 7d) were histomorphometrically measured with respect to the hard tissue fraction of the trabecular bone (HTFTB, %) and statistically analyzed.

Results

Histomorphometric measurements showed the following results: Mean HTFTB of IRA 3–4 was 44.08%, of IRA 4–5 31.07%, of IRA 5–6 33.96%, of IRA 6–7 36.33% and of IRA 7d 25.40%. Only the difference between the HTFTB of IRA 3–4 and the other IRAs was statistically significant (p < 0.05). Regarding the minimum and maximum HTFTB value of each IRA, there was a great amount of difference, especially for IRA 3–4: minimum HTFTB was 17.20% and maximum 67.03%.

Conclusion

Apart from the IRA between canine and first premolar, the HTFTB in the IRAs of the lateral maxilla have to be classified as low or even moderate. IRA 3–4 should also be considered cautious regarding its minimum values. Thus, it seems that the interradicular trabecular bone density of the lateral maxilla is unfavorable to achieve a good primary stability of TADs.

【 授权许可】

   
2015 Krieger and Wehrbein; licensee BioMed Central.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

Figure 3.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Schätzle M, Männchen R, Zwahlen M, Lang NP: Survival and failure rates of orthodontic temporary anchorage devices: a systematic review. Clin Oral Implants Res 2009, 20:1351-9.
• [2]Misch CE: Density of bone: effect on treatment plans, surgical approach, healing, and progressive bone loading. Int J Oral Implantol 1990, 7:9.
• [3]Samrit V, Kharbanda OP, Duggal R, Seith A, Malhotra V: Bone density and miniscrew stability in orthodontic patients. Aust Orthod J 2012, 28:204-12.
• [4]Kim JH, Park YC: Evaluation of mandibular cortical bone thickness for placement of temporary anchorage devices (TADs). Korean J Orthod 2012, 42:110-7.
• [5]Chugh T, Ganeshkar SV, Revankar AV, Jain AK: Quantitative assessment of interradicular bone density in the maxilla and mandible: implications in clinical orthodontics. Prog Orthod 2013, 14:38. BioMed Central Full Text
• [6]Chun YS, Lim WH: Bone density at interradicular sites: implications for orthodontic mini-implant placement. Orthod Craniofac Res 2009, 12:25-32.
• [7]Cassetta M, Sofan AA, Altieri F, Barbato E: Evaluation of alveolar cortical bone thickness and density for orthodontic mini-implant placement. J Clin Exp Dent 2013, 5:245-52.
• [8]Marquezan M, Lima I, Lopes RT, Sant’Anna EF, de Souza MM: Is trabecular bone related to primary stability of miniscrews? Angle Orthod 2014, 84:500-7.
• [9]Wehrbein H: Bone quality in the midpalate for temporary anchorage devices. Clin Oral Implants Res 2009, 20:45-9.
• [10]Çehreli S, Arman-Özçırpıcı A: Primary stability and histomorphometric bone-implant contact of self-drilling and self-tapping orthodontic microimplants. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2012, 141:187-95.
• [11]Donath K: Die Trenn-Dünnschliff-Technik zur Herstellung histologischer Präparate von nicht schneidbaren Geweben und Materialien. Der Präparator 1988, 34:197-206. (in German)
• [12]Malluche HH, Sherman D, Meyer W, Massry SG: A new semiautomatic method for quantitative static and dynamic bone histology. Calcif Tissue Int 1982, 34:439-48.
• [13]Cha JY, Kil JK, Yoon TM, Hwang CJ: Miniscrew stability evaluated with computerized tomography scanning. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2010, 137:73-9.
• [14]Santiago RC, de Paula FO, Fraga MR, Assis NMSP, Vitral RWF: Correlation between miniscrew stability and bone mineral density in orthodontic patients. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2009, 136:243-50.
• [15]González-García R, Monje F: The reliability of cone-beam computed tomography to assess bone density at dental implant recipient sites: a histomorphometric analysis by micro-CT. Clin Oral Implants Res 2013, 24:871-9.
• [16]Wakimoto M, Matsumura T, Ueno T, Mizukawa N, Yanagi Y, Iida S: Bone quality and quantity of the anterior maxillary trabecular bone in dental implant sites. Clin Oral Implants Res 2012, 23:1314-9.
• [17]Jung BA, Kunkel M, Göllner P, Liechti T, Wagner W, Wehrbein H: Prognostic parameters contributing to palatal implant failures: a long-term survival analysis of 239 patients. Clin Oral Implants Res 2012, 23:746-50.
• [18]Hsu JT, Chang HW, Huang HL, Yu JH, Li YF, Tu MG: Bone density changes around teeth during orthodontic treatment. Clin Oral Investig 2011, 15:511-9.