4.3 Review

Failure rates and associated risk factors of orthodontic miniscrew implants: A meta-analysis

Publisher

MOSBY-ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2012.05.016

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Introduction: Risk factors concerning orthodontic miniscrew implants have not been adequately assessed. In this systematic review, we summarize the knowledge from published clinical trials regarding the failure rates of miniscrew implants used for orthodontic anchorage purposes and identify the factors that possibly affect them. Methods: Nineteen electronic databases and reference lists of included studies were searched up to February 2011, with no restrictions. Only randomized controlled trials, prospective controlled trials, and prospective cohort studies were included. Study selection and data extraction were performed twice. Failure event rates, relative risks, and the corresponding 95% confidence intervals were calculated. The random-effects model was used to assess each factor's impact. Subgroup and meta-regression analyses were also implemented. Results: Fifty-two studies were included for the overall miniscrew implant failure rate and 30 studies for the investigation of risk factors. From the 4987 miniscrew implants used in 2281 patients, the overall failure rate was 13.5% (95% confidence interval, 11.5-15.8). Failures of miniscrew implants were not associated with patient sex or age and miniscrew implant insertion side, whereas they were significantly associated with jaw of insertion. Certain trends were identified through exploratory analysis; however, because of the small number of original studies, no definite conclusions could be drawn. Conclusions: Orthodontic miniscrew implants have a modest small mean failure rate, indicating their usefulness in clinical practice. Although many factors seem to affect their failure rates, the majority of them still need additional evidence to support any possible associations. (Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2012; 142: 577-95)

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available