Skip to main content

Table 2 Characteristics of the included studies (TPA transpalatal arch, RCT randomized controlled clinical trial, CCT controlled clinical trial)

From: Efficacy of orthodontic mini implants for en masse retraction in the maxilla: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Reference Number of patients Type of study (RCT/CCT/other) Control intervention Type of implant (length, material) Number of implants Location of implant Mode of anchorage (direct/indirect)
Al-Sibaie and Hajeer [1] 56 (28 implant, 28 non implant) RCT TPA Self-drilling titanium mini implants (1.6 mm diameter and 7 mm length; Tuttlingen, Germany) 2 Between the maxillary second premolar and first molar Direct
Basha et al. [4] 14 (7 implant, 7 non implant) RCT TPA Surgical steel mini implants (1.3 mm diameter, 8 mm length; SK Surgical, Pune, India.) 2 Placed between the roots of second premolar and first molar in the maxilla Direct
Benson et al. [5] 51 (23 implant; 24 non implant) RCT Headgear Ortho implant, (6 mm length, Straumann, Waldenburg, Switzerland) 1 Midpalatal Indirect
Chopra et al. [9] 50 (25 implant; 25 non implant) RCT Nance button; lingual arch Self-drilling titanium ortho implants 4 Buccal alveolar bone between the second premolars and first molars in all the four quadrants Indirect
Davoody et al. [11] 46 (23 implant, 23 non-implant group) RCT Intrusion arch and mushroom loops 1.8–2 mm in width, 8–9 mm in length 4 Placed between maxillary second premolars and first molars in all four quadrants Direct
Liu et al. [28] 34 RCT TPA Self-tapping titanium mini-screw implants (8 mm length, 1.2 mm diameter, Cibei, Ningbo, China) 2 Between the roots of the first molar and the second premolar Direct
Upadhyay et al. [49] 30 (15 implant, 15 non-implant) RCT Treatment in control group not specified: Nance holding arch, extraoral traction, banding of the second molars, and differential moments Custom made at our institute by modifying conventional surgical screws, measuring 1.3 mm in diameter and 8 mm in length 2 Placed between the maxillary second premolar and first molar, preferably between the attached and movable mucosae Direct
Upadhyay et al. [48] 23 Other (cohort study) No control group Titanium mini implants (1.3 mm in diameter and 8 mm in length) 2 Placed between the roots of the first molar and the second premolar in both upper quadrants Direct
Upadhyay et al. [50] 40 (20 implant, 20 non implant) RCT Conventional methods such as headgears, transpalatal arches, banding of second molars, application of differential moments Titanium mini implants (1.3 mm diameter, 8 mm length) 4 Between the roots of the first molar and second premolar in all four quadrants Direct
Victor et al. [52] 20 (10 implant, 10 non-implant) RCT NiTi closed coil spring Absoanchor—SH 1312-08; (1.3 mm diameter, 8 mm length) 4 Placed between the roots of second premolar and first molar in the upper arch, the screw insertion was angulated at 40° and 8 mm gingival to the archwire Direct
Wehrbein et al. [54] 9 Other (cohort study) No control group Orthosystem (diameter 3.3 mm, lengths are 4 and 6 mm) 1 Midpalatal Indirect
Wilmes et al. [57] 20 (10 in implant group of which 5 patients had additional transversal reinforcement and 5 did not, 10 in non-implant group) CCT TPA 2.0 × 10 mm, Dual Top™, Jeil Medical Corporation, Seoul, South Korea, or 2.0 × 11 mm, BENEFIT, Mondeal Medical Systems, Mühlheim a.d. Donau, Germany 1 Placed in the anterior palate Indirect