Assessment of interradicular space of the posterior palatal alveolar process for orthodontic mini-implant in different facial morphological pattern - a prospective study.
Keywords:
N\AAbstract
Background:Orthodontic mini-implants, commonly referred to as temporary anchorage devices, provide reliable skeletal anchorage and have become an important component of contemporary orthodontic treatment. Successful placement of these devices requires adequate interradicular space and sufficient cortical bone thickness to avoid root injury and ensure primary stability. Cone-beam computed tomography allows precise three-dimensional evaluation of alveolar bone morphology and has become a valuable tool for identifying safe insertion sites for orthodontic mini-implants.
Objective:To evaluate the interradicular distance and the distance from the palatal cortical bone surface to the narrowest interradicular space in the posterior palatal alveolar process between the maxillary second premolar and 1st molars among individuals with different facial growth patterns using CBCT imaging.
Materials and Methods:This retrospective CBCT-based study analysed images obtained from individuals categorized according to facial growth patterns. Measurements of interradicular distance and the distance from the palatal cortical bone surface to the narrowest interradicular space were recorded at multiple vertical levels from the cemento-enamel junction in the posterior palatal interdental region between the maxillary second premolar and 1st molars. Statistical analysis was performed to evaluate variations among different vertical levels and facial growth patterns.
Results:Both interradicular distance and the distance from the palatal cortical bone surface to the narrowest interradicular space increased progressively with increasing distance from the CEJ. The region located approximately 6–8 mm apical to the CEJ demonstrated the greatest interradicular space and cortical bone engagement, indicating favourable anatomical conditions for orthodontic mini-implant placement.
Conclusion:The posterior palatal interdental region between the maxillary 2nd premolar and 1st molars at approximately 6–8 mm apical to the CEJ represents the most favourable site for orthodontic mini-implant placement. Preoperative CBCT
evaluation is recommended to accurately assess interdental bone morphology and identify safe insertion zones, thereby minimising the risk of root proximity and improving the stability of temporary anchorage devices
Downloads
References
Lee JA, Ahn HW, Oh SH, Park KH, Kim SH, Nelson G. Evaluation of interradicular space, soft tissue, and hard tissue of the posterior palatal alveolar process for orthodontic mini-implant, using cone-beam computed tomography. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics. 2021 ;159(4):460-9.
2. Gupta SP, Niroula D, Budha Magar N. Assessment of interradicular areas and cortical bone thickness for orthodontic mini-implant placement: a cone-beam computed tomography study. BMC Oral Health. 2025 ;25(1):825.
3. Golshah A, Salahshour M, Nikkerdar N. Interradicular distance and alveolar bone thickness for miniscrew insertion: a CBCT study of Persian adults with different sagittal skeletal patterns. BMC Oral Health. 2021 ;21(1):534.
4. Sarje S, Despande R, Ashtekar S, Gajapurada J, Ranjan A, Kulshrestha R, Shah K. Measurement of inter radicular bone width in different growth patterns for determining safe zone for placement of miniscrew implants–a cone beam computed tomography study. IP Indian Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Research. 2023 ;7(2):137-43.
5. Kim SH, Yoon HG, Choi YS, Hwang EH, Kook YA, Nelson G. Evaluation of interdental space of the maxillary posterior area for orthodontic mini-implants with cone-beam computed tomography. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics. 2009 ;135(5):635-41.
6. Dharmadeep G, Naik MK, Reddy YM, Cheruluri S, Raj KP, Reddy BR.
Three-dimensional evaluation of interradicular areas and cortical bone thickness for orthodontic miniscrew implant placement using cone-beam computed tomography. Journal of Pharmacy and Bioallied Sciences. 2020 ;12(Suppl 1):S99-104.
7. Wang Y, Qiu Y, Liu H, He J, Fan X. Quantitative evaluation of palatal bone thickness for the placement of orthodontic miniscrews in adults with different facial types. Saudi Medical Journal. 2017 ;38(10):1051.
8. Gaffuri F, Cossellu G, Maspero C, Lanteri V, Ugolini A, Rasperini G, Castro IO, Farronato M. Correlation between facial growth patterns and cortical bone thickness assessed with cone-beam computed tomography in young adult untreated patients. The Saudi dental journal. 2021 ;33(3):161-7.
9. Menezes CC, Barros SE, Tonello DL, Aliaga-Del Castillo A, Garib D, Bellini-Pereira SA, Janson G. Influence of the growth pattern on cortical bone thickness and mini-implant stability. Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics. 2020;25(06):33-42.
10. Yaseen TA, Younis H, Aghayants S, Yin M, Cheng B. Impact of vertical facial type on alveolar bone thickness and tooth morphology: A retrospective CBCT-based clinical study. Journal of Stomatology, Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery. 2025 ;126(4):102128.
11. Pineida LA, Zapata ME, Balseca MA, Freitas KM, Ganan AD. Palatal bone thickness in adult patients with different facial patterns: A retrospective cross-sectional CBCT study for orthodontic miniscrew planning. International Orthodontics. 2026 ;24(1):101058.
12. Fayed MM, Pazera P, Katsaros C. Optimal sites for orthodontic mini-implant placement assessed by cone beam computed tomography. The Angle Orthodontist. 2010 ;80(5):939-51.
13. AlSamak S, Gkantidis N, Bitsanis E, Christou P. Assessment of potential orthodontic mini-implant insertion sites based on anatomical hard tissue parameters: a systematic review. International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants. 2012 ;27(4).
14. Winsauer H, Vlachojannis C, Bumann A, Vlachojannis J, Chrubasik S. Paramedian vertical palatal bone height for mini-implant insertion: a systematic review. European journal of orthodontics. 2014 ;36(5):541-9.
15. Lee KJ, Joo E, Kim KD, Lee JS, Park YC, Yu HS. Computed tomographic analysis of tooth-bearing alveolar bone for orthodontic miniscrew placement. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics. 2009 ;135(4):486-94.
16. Santiago RC, de Paula FO, Fraga MR, Assis NM, Vitral RW. Correlation between miniscrew stability and bone mineral density in orthodontic patients. American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics. 2009 ;136(2):243-50.
17. Menezes CC, Janson G, da Silveira Massaro C, Cambiaghi L, Garib DG. Precision, reproducibility, and accuracy of bone crest level measurements of CBCT cross sections using different resolutions. The Angle Orthodontist. 2016 ;86(4):535-42.
18. Timock AM, Cook V, McDonald T, Leo MC, Crowe J, Benninger BL, Covell Jr DA. Accuracy and reliability of buccal bone height and thickness measurements from cone-beam computed tomography imaging. American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics. 2011 ;140(5):734-44.
19. Tepedino M, Cattaneo PM, Niu X, Cornelis MA. Interradicular sites and cortical bone thickness for miniscrew insertion: A systematic review with meta-analysis. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics. 2020 ;158(6):783-98.
20. Motoyoshi M, Hirabayashi M, Uemura M, Shimizu N. Recommended placement torque when tightening an orthodontic mini‐implant. Clinical oral implants research. 2006 ;17(1):109-14.
21. Kuroda S, Sugawara Y, Deguchi T, Kyung HM, Takano-Yamamoto T. Clinical use of miniscrew implants as orthodontic anchorage: success rates and postoperative discomfort. American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics. 2007 ;131(1):9-15.
22. Kyung HM, Park HS, Bae SM, Sung JH, Kim IB. Development of orthodontic micro-implants for intraoral anchorage. Journal of clinical orthodontics: JCO. 2003 ;37(6):321-8.
23. Costa A, Raffainl M, Melsen B. Miniscrews as orthodontic anchorage: a preliminary report. The International journal of adult orthodontics and orthognathic surgery. 1998 ;13(3):201-9.
24. Scarfe WC, Farman AG. What is cone-beam CT and how does it work? Dental Clinics of North America. 2008 ;52(4):707-30.
25. Park HS, Jeong SH, Kwon OW. Factors affecting the clinical success of screw implants used as orthodontic anchorage. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics. 2006 ;130(1):18-25.
26. Ludwig B, Glasl B, Bowman SJ, Wilmes B, Kinzinger GS, Lisson JA. Anatomical guidelines for miniscrew insertion: palatal sites. Journal of clinical orthodontics: JCO. 2011 ;45(8):433-67.
27. Kim SH, Yoon HG, Choi YS, Hwang EH, Kook YA, Nelson G. Evaluation of interdental space of the maxillary posterior area for orthodontic mini-implants with cone-beam computed tomography. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics. 2009 ;135(5):635-41.
28. Yu SK, Lee MH, Park BS, Jeon YH, Chung YY, Kim HJ. Topographical relationship of the greater palatine artery and the palatal spine. Significance for periodontal surgery. Journal of clinical periodontology. 2014 ;41(9):908-13.
29. Kravitz ND, Kusnoto B. Risks and complications of orthodontic miniscrews. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics. 2007 ;131(4):S43-51
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
You are free to:
- Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format
- Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
Terms:
- Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
- No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
