Recycling of Grade 23 titanium mini-implants: Micrographic study and breaking strength.
PDF (Français (France))

Keywords

Breaking point, grade 23 titanium, mini-implant, recycled, torsional strength

How to Cite

KACI, N. . (2023). Recycling of Grade 23 titanium mini-implants: Micrographic study and breaking strength. Medical Focus Journal, 1(1). Retrieved from https://journals.univ-tlemcen.dz/MFJ/index.php/MFJ/article/view/17

Abstract

Introduction: The aim of this study was to identify the fracture resistance of Grade 23 Titanium mini-implants recycled fororthodontic purposes and having stayed in the mouth during different periods of time. Materials and methods: A total of 104 hybrid-designed titanium mini-implants, threaded length L=8 mm, self-drilling and self-taping were used in 64 patients presenting orthodontic anomalies which required the use of mini-implants. Two types of tests were performed: polarizing optical imagery to assess the surface characteristics of the mini-implants (polarizing optical microscopy) and (mechanical) torsional strength tests, more quantitative, in order to establish the breaking point of the mini-implants during their re-use. Results: For the mini-implants which had been in the mouth for a short period of time, (immediate removal or after two months of use), it must be noted that their surface characteristics revealed no defect at micron scale, the drilling head did not show any alteration, with a breaking point record of about53N/cm2. In contrast, the mini-implants, which had stayed in the mouth for 12 and 14 months, showed surface alterations especially at the “screw-gingiva” interface and the rupture stress ranges from 42 to 39 N/cm2 , respectively. Discussion: Our results show that the resistance to fracture of there-used mini-implants is inversely proportional to the duration of stay in the mouth.

PDF (Français (France))

References

Garfinkle J S, Cunningham L L, Beeman C S, Kluemper G T, Hicks E P, Kim MO.Evaluation of orthodontic mini-implant anchorage in premolar extraction therapy in adolescents, AmJ OrthodDentofacialOrthop2008;133:642-653.

Kuroda S, Sugawara Y, Deguchi T, Kyung H-M, Takano-Yamamoto T. Clinical use of miniscrew implants as orthodontic anchorage: success rates and postoperative discomfort. AmJ OrthodDentofacialOrthop 2007; 131:9-15.

Melsen B.Miniscrew implants: The Aarhus anchorage system, Rev Orthop Dento Fac 2005; 11:24-31.

Le Gall M, Matossian L, FilippiR. La minivis Ancora® en acier chirurgical M25. In: Bassigny F, Chillès D, Chillès J-G, Dumoulin B, Filippi R, Le Gall M, Matossian L, Thébault B, Watcher L. Nouvelles conceptions de l’ancrage en

Orthodontie.ed, CDP, 2013; 57-59.

Lazaroo B, Tilotta F,Ernoult J-F. Les minivis. Ancrage osseux en omnipratique et en orthodontie.Mémento, 2010.

Kuroda S, Yamada K, Deguchi T et al.Root proximity is a major factor for screw failure in orthodontic anchorage. Am J OrthodDentofacialOrthop 2007;131:00.

Ellouze S, Darqué F.Miniimplants/L’orthodontiededemain(260p). edQ uintessence International, 2012.

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

Copyright (c) 2023 Medical Focus Journal