ArticleBMC oral health2024
Success rates of single-thread and double-thread orthodontic miniscrews in the maxillary arch.
Article in BMC oral health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Bone-Screw-Force Interactions in Palatal Orthodontic Mini-Implants: A Scoping Review and Decision Framework for Primary Stability and Biomechanically Driven Site Selection.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2026Review
- Success Rate of Immediately Loaded Orthodontic Temporary Anchorage Devices: A Retrospective Analysis of Patient- and Treatment-Related Factors.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Clinical and radiographic assessment of the association between orthodontic mini-screws and periodontal health.BMC oral health · 2024Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimThere is limited research on the clinical performance of double-thread orthodontic miniscrews. This study aimed to compare the stability of double-thread and single-thread orthodontic miniscrews and identify the potential associations between patient-related and location-related factors with miniscrew stability.
methodsThis retrospective cohort study involved 90 orthodontic miniscrews (45 single-thread, 45 double-thread) with identical dimensions (8 mm length, 1.6 mm diameter). The screws were inserted in various locations within the upper jaw of 83 patients (54 females, 29 males; mean age = 15.1 ± 2.4 years). Failure was defined as excessive mobility or loss of miniscrew after placement. The data recorded were patient age, gender, insertion site, side of insertion (buccal or lingual), duration of force application, and failure occurrence.
resultsThe overall success rate within the sample was 92.2%. Double-thread miniscrews exhibited a significantly higher success rate than single-thread miniscrews (P = 0.049), with 97.8% and 86.7% success rates, respectively. Gender, age, insertion location, and side of insertion did not show significant associations with failure (P > 0.05). Log-rank analysis revealed a significant difference between the two groups (P = 0.046), indicating a higher probability of survival for the double-thread design.
conclusionsThe overall success rate of orthodontic miniscrews was high in the present sample. Double-thread miniscrews placed in various locations within the maxillary arch demonstrated superior stability and survival rates compared to their single-thread counterparts. Therefore, double-thread miniscrews may be preferred when bone quality is inadequate, such as in young patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.