Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33748887›Full record

ArticleProgress in orthodontics2021

Mechanical strength of stainless steel and titanium alloy mini-implants with different diameters: an experimental laboratory study.

Sérgio Estelita Barros, Viviane Vanz, Kelly Chiqueto, Guilherme Janson, Eduardo Ferreira

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Progress in orthodontics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
4.8field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed, 28 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Bioinformation · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Sérgio Estelita BarrosDivision of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, Rua Ramiro Barcelos 2492, Porto Alegre, RS, 90035-003, Brazil. sergioestelita@yahoo.com.br.
Viviane VanzDivision of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, Rua Ramiro Barcelos 2492, Porto Alegre, RS, 90035-003, Brazil.
Kelly ChiquetoDivision of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, Rua Ramiro Barcelos 2492, Porto Alegre, RS, 90035-003, Brazil.
Guilherme JansonDepartment of Orthodontics, Bauru Dental School, University of São Paulo, Alameda Octávio Pinheiro Brisolla 9-75, Bauru, SP, 17012-901, Brazil.
Eduardo FerreiraDivision of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, Rua Ramiro Barcelos 2492, Porto Alegre, RS, 90035-003, Brazil.
Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul · BRUniversidade de São Paulo · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe mechanical strength of mini-implants is a critical factor due to their small diameters. Currently, it is not possible to state whether there is a relevant difference between the mechanical properties of stainless steel (SS-MIs) and titanium alloy mini-implants (TA-MIs). The objective of this study was to test the null hypothesis that there is no difference in the mechanical strength of SS-MIs and TA-MIs, and to analyze, by scanning electron microscopy (SEM), the SS-MI, and TA-MI threads resistance to morphological damage after insertion.

methodsA standardized sample of 504 SS-MIs and TA-MIs with diameters ranging from 1.2 mm to 1.8 mm was used. Torsional fracture was performed in 154 MIs. Flexural strength of 280 MIs was evaluated at 1 mm and 2 mm-deflection. The threads of 70 MIs were morphologically analyzed by scanning electron microscopy (SEM), before and after their insertion in high-density artificial bone blocks. Comparisons between SS-MIs and TA-MIs were performed with t tests or Mann-Whitney U tests. A multiple linear regression analysis was used to evaluate the influence of variables on the ranging of MI mechanical strength.

resultsSS-MIs had higher fracture torque. The mean difference between the SS-MIs and TA-MIs fracture torque was of 4.09 Ncm. The MI diameter explained 90.3% of the total variation in fracture torque, while only 2.2% was explained by the metallic alloy. The SS-MI group presented a higher deformation force during the 1mm and 2mm-deflection. The mean difference between the flexural strength of SS and TA-MIs at 1 mm and 2 mm-deflection was of 18.21 N and 17.55 N, respectively. There was no noticeable morphological damage to the threads of SS-MIs and TA-MIs.

conclusionsThe null hypothesis was rejected. SS-MIs were 13.2% and 20.2% more resistant to torsional fracture and deflection, respectively. The threads of the SS-MIs and TA-MIs were not damaged during the insertion and removal process. Thus, the use of SS-MI can reduce the fracture risk without increasing the MI diameter.

Indexed as

Orthodontic Anchorage ProceduresStainless SteelAlloysHumansLaboratoriesMaterials TestingOrthodontic Appliance DesignStress, MechanicalTitaniumTorqueAlloysStainless SteelTitaniumFlexural strengthMini-implantOrthodontic anchorageStainless SteelTitanium alloyTorsional strength

Identifiers

PMID33748887
PMCPMC7982375
OpenAlexW3138752317

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.