Page 14 - MDJ 2022 Jan-Jun, Volume 45 Number 1

Malaysian Dental Journal Volume 45 Issue 1/2022
 2022 The Malaysian Dental Association
MALAYSIAN DENTAL JOURNAL

Orthodontic Mini Implant: Malaysian perspective

Husun S Centre of Paediatric Dentistry and Orthodontic Studies, Faculty of Dentistry, Universiti Teknologi MARA
(UiTM), 47000 Sungai Buloh, Selangor, Malaysia.

Md Dasor M* Centre of Paediatric Dentistry and Orthodontic Studies, Faculty of Dentistry, Universiti Teknologi MARA
(UiTM), 47000 Sungai Buloh, Selangor, Malaysia.

Correspondence: Assoc Prof Dr Maryati Md Dasor, [email protected]
_________________________________________________________________________________
ABSTRACT

Orthodontic practice should gravitate towards a predictable outcome with minimal side effects while optimising patient comfort. Mini-
implant (MI) is one of the great innovations in orthodontics of our time. Although it will not replace a well-trained orthodontist’s skills
and experience, contemporary philosophies can change the way we achieve great results. Our focus for this article is to provide clinicians
the overview and clinically significant information of currently available systems of MI in Malaysia.
Key words: orthodontic mini-implant; clinical application; anchorage; Malaysia.

_________________________________________________________________________________________________

INTRODUCTION Patient selection and knowledge of the variations of
anatomical sites for MIs are critical, and as clinicians we
Conventional approaches to anchorage in the should know when to manipulate the MI to fit the
practice of orthodontics have pivoted around provision of characteristics of the site, as the diameter, length, and
7,8
elaborate constructs and uncomfortable auxiliaries which designs vary depending on the site.
worked well during their time. However, it is often used
with an acceptance that compromises in anchorage may Preference in geometry may come with years of
result in an unpredictable outcome. The advent of mini clinical experience for clinicians; for the inexperienced, it
implant (MI) has been an outcome changer in orthodontics remains a challenge that leads to some reservation to join
with a solid growing body of evidence that contributes to the bandwagon. Constantly emerging new products add to
the relegation of other elaborate means of anchorage. the already saturated MI market, supplying clinicians with
1–3
This contemporary approach heralds a new era in the too many options. It will certainly be a time consuming
struggle to fight unwanted movement at the luxury of our and daunting task to delve into the literature to find the
4,5
patients’ comfort. When discussing MIs in orthodontics, most suitable MI.
the evidence needs to be analysed with caution because, in
contrast to the prosthetic implant, the stability of the MI is MI DISTRIBUTION AND PREFERENCE IN
mainly from the primary stability, which is the mechanical MALAYSIA
retention with partial osseointegration whilst prosthetics
implant require full osseointegration. The amount of Our focus for this article is to provide clinicians
osseointegration required for MIs is rather controversial with an overview of and the clinically significant
across the literature. A MI is perhaps the only implant that information on the MI systems currently available in
is considered as successful when it is removed. Success in Malaysia. It may be worthwhile to know what brands are
MIs is the ability to maintain zero anchorage loss and resist being distributed. Perhaps the clinical reports and research
active tooth movement forces, which is cumulative of that has been published internationally provide a degree of
primary and secondary stability. The aim is centred on evidence to the selection of MIs. Information regarding
primary stability derived from the cortical bone to ensure types of MIs based on the manufacturer were collected via
a good scaffold for the secondary stability. The stability is personal communications among clinicians in higher
multifactorial but to put simply, it is affected by three main learning institutions, the Ministry of Health, the Ministry
factors which is the host, the MI, and clinical factor. of Defence, and private practices, as well as via electronic
6

13