International Orthodontics 2020; 18: 503–508

Websites:
www.em-consulte.com
www.sciencedirect.com

Original Article
The ideal insertion angle after immediate
loading in Jeil, Storm, and Thunder
miniscrews: A 3D-FEM study

Mauro Cozzani 1, Ludovica Nucci 2, Daniela Lupini 3, Hedieh Dolatshahizand 4, Delaram Fazeli 4,
Esmaeil Barzkar 6, Ehsan Naeini 5, Abdolreza Jamilian 4

Available online: 6 May 2020 1. Istituto Giuseppe Cozzani, La Spezia, Italy

2. Dental School, Multidisciplinary Department of Medical-Surgical and Dental
Specialties, University of Campania Luigi Vanvitelli, Naples, Italy
3. Scuola di Specializzazione in Ortognatodonzia Un di Trieste and Istituto Giuseppe
Cozzani, La Spezia, Italy
4. Department of orthodontics, Dental School, Cranio Maxillofacial Research Center,
Tehran medical sciences, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
5. Department of oral and maxillofacial Surgery, Faculty of dentistry, Cranio
Maxillofacial Research Center, Tehran medical sciences, Islamic Azad University,
Tehran, Iran
6. Mechanical engineering, Sharif university of technology, Tehran, Iran

Correspondence:
Abdolreza Jamilian, No 14, Pesiyan St., Vali Asr St., 1986944768 Tehran, Iran.
info@jamilian.net

Keywords Summary
Insertion angle
Bone anchorage Objective > The miniscrew is effectively used to provide additional anchorage for orthodontic
TADS purposes. The aim of this study was to identify an optimal insertion angle for Jeil, Storm, and
Miniscrew Thunder miniscrews on stress distribution at the bone miniscrew interface.
Mini implant Materials and methods > To perform 3-dimensional finite element model analysis, a 3-dimensional
model with a bone block was constructed with type D2 of bone quality, and with miniscrews of
Storm, Thunder, Jeil, with the diameter of 2, 1.5. 1.6 mm and length 15.9, 12.4, 14.4 mm
respectively. The miniscrews were inserted at 158 308, 458, 608, 758 and 908 to the bone surface.
A simulated horizontal orthodontic force of 200 gram was applied to the centre of the miniscrews
head in all models, and stress distribution and its magnitude were evaluated with a 3-dimensional
finite element analysis program.
Results > In the cancellous bone, minimum stress was found at placement angles of 908 for Jeil and
Storm, which was 0.37 and 0.39 MPa respectively, and 158 for Thunder, which was 0.85 MPa. The
maximum von Mises stresses in the cancellous bone for Jeil was at 608, which was 0.92 MPa, and
for Thunder at 908, which was 1.3 MPa.
Conclusion > Each miniscrew has an ideal insertion angle, optimal insertion positions were found
within 908 for Jeil and for Storm but 158 for Thunder. Clinical significance 3-dimensional finite
element analysis confirmed that each miniscrew has an ideal insertion angle according to its
characteristics.
503

tome 18 > n83 > September 2020

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ortho.2020.03.003
© 2020 CEO. Published by Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.
 M. Cozzani, L. Nucci, D. Lupini, H. Dolatshahizand, D. Fazeli, E. Barzkar, et al.
Original Article

Introduction
In recent years, miniscrews have become popular because of
their versatility, minimal surgical invasiveness, low cost and
increase the overall treatment spectrum [1,2]. The optimal
insertion angle has an important role for anchorage, bio-
mechanical consideration, risk of damage to adjacent teeth
and also delivers enhanced surface contact area between the
bone and miniscrew. However, the insertion angle stated in the
literature varies from 30 to 90 degrees [3] and the optimal
insertion angulations on miniscrew stability is unknown [4].
Finite element model analysis (FEMA) provides an effective
computational tool, which offers a stable and non-invasive
alternative method for measuring the response of the structures
to the applied external loads under certain boundary conditions.
The amount of stress distribution can be measured between the
contact area of the mini-screw and the cortical, trabecular bone
which plays a major role in the success or failure of the min-
iscrew. It can also be used to analyse maximum stress, deflec-
tion, vibration, buckling behaviour, and many other phenomena
[5]. Based on the aim of tooth movement, miniscrews may be
used in various direction, thus understanding of how the force is
transmitted to the miniscrews and cortical and cancellous bone
would be valuable to clinicians.
The aims of the present study were to measure the distribution
of stress patterns in the miniscrew and the bone immediately
after loading in angles of 158 308, 458, 608, 758 and 908 in Jeil,
Storm, and Thunder miniscews and thus establish a scientific
basis for selection of an optimized insertion angle of a miniscrew
to be used for orthodontic anchorage.
The helix profile for pedicel divided into three sections: the
initiative grooving, main thread and end helix profile. For
Storm and Jeil cases, the main stems had an even helix in
contrast to Thunder. Thunder, however have a helix angle of 1.6
degree. The pitch parameter for Thunder and Storm was
0.7 mm and 0.75 for Jeil. The shank diameter of the main
implants was 2, 1.6 and 1.5 mm for Storm, Jeil and Thunder
respectively.
Two of the three implants namely Thunder and Storm, have a
tapping region, which was considered in the FE model as well.
Based on common information about cortical and cancellous
bones, the cortical thickness was assumed to be 1 mm and the
rest of the thickness dedicated to cancellous until the end of
the miniscrew. Three-dimensional finite element models of
3 types of miniscrews were constructed. Storm, Thunder and
Jeil had the diameter of 2, 1.5 and 1.6 mm and length of 15.9,
12.4 and 14.4 mm respectively (figures 1 and 2). All minis-
crews individually assembled to cortical and cancellous blocks
and the proper cavity was vacuumed. A bone block was
modelled for the current research in order to simplify and
decrease the time for analysis. The height, width, and depth of
the bone block was 8  14  10 mm (figure 3). A 3-dimen-
sional model with a bone block was constructed with type D2
of bone quality. The miniscrews were modelled at various
direction regarding cortical bone. The insertion angle perpen-
dicular to the cortical bone was determined as 908. The min-
iscrews were inserted at 158 308, 458, 608, 758 and 908 to the
bone surface. Maximum von Mises stress distribution at the

Materials and methods

A precise three-dimensional finite element model for each
miniscrew as well as cortical and cancellous bones were created.
The software utilized for this purpose is ANSYS Space Claim
Design Modeler (SCDM) which imbedded in the ANSYS Products
v19.5 (R3), the leading FE package commercial software in the
world, developed in Canonsburg Pa, USA. In this study 3 different
miniscrews consisting of Storm, Thunder, Jeil were used. The
source of them was STL rough file from its original company and
they had the following characteristics:
 Storm, Kristal S.r.l. via F.lli Rosselli, 64 - 20090 Trezzano S/N

(MI), Italy;
 Thunder, Kristal S.r.l. via F.lli Rosselli, 64 - 20090 Trezzano S/N

(MI), Italy;
 Jeil, Code 16-G2-012 Titanium Alloy (Ti-6Al-4V) Thread Length:

12 mm Thread outer diameter: Ø1.60 Thread core

diameter: Ø1.06, South Korea.
Because of the aim of the survey investigation of the effect of
the implanting angle on stress distribution in implants, the Figure 1
maximum accuracy for modelling of thread profiles and other Three-dimensional finite element models of 3 types of
intricate regions was fully modelled. miniscrews; Storm = 1, Jeil = 2, Thunder = 3
504

tome 18 > n83 > September 2020

The ideal insertion angle after immediate loading in Jeil, Storm, and Thunder miniscrews: A 3D-FEM study

Original Article
Figure 2
Schematic representation of the dimensions of the miniscrews; Storm = 1, Jeil = 2, Thunder = 3

cancellous bone of Storm miniscrew to bone blocks at 158 308,

458, 608, 758 and 908 is shown in the figure 4a–f.
Young's modulus and Poisson's ratio for the teeth, periodontal
ligament, miniscrew, and wire were calculated based on the
classifications of Vollmer et al. [6] and Reimann et al. [7] Young's
modulus and Poisson's ratio can be seen in table I. The number
of nodes and elements generated for each model are described
in table II.
The retraction force was applied to the centre of the miniscrew
through the closed-coil springs from the miniscrew to head of
the miniscrew. A simulated retraction force of 200 gram parallel
to bone surface was loaded to the centre of the miniscrews,
which was exerted by means of a spring. The amount of force is
applied normally to miniscrew in clinical practice [8].
The mechanical properties of the miniscrews and biological
Figure 3 components were inserted in the software [9]. After application
Micro implant inserted at block
of force, maximum stresses generated on the miniscrew and in

Figure 4
Maximum von Mises stress distribution at the cancellous bone; a: in 158; b: in 308; c: in 458; d: in 608; e: in 758; f: in 908
505

tome 18 > n83 > September 2020

 M. Cozzani, L. Nucci, D. Lupini, H. Dolatshahizand, D. Fazeli, E. Barzkar, et al.
Original Article

TABLE I TABLE III

Material Properties of various components used in this study. Maximum von Mises stress distributions.

Component Young module (GPa) Poisson module Angle (deg)

Force transforming spring 200 0.3 15 30 45 60 75 90

Micro implant 110 0.36 Thunder

Cortical bone 14.7 0.3 Screw 19.8 16.4 18.8 23.9 32.3 14.0

Cancellous bone (D2) 5.5 0.3 Cortex 6.37 8.7 7.56 9.9 6.43 5.1

Cancellous 0.85 0.98 0.88 0.9 0.9 1.3

Jeil
Screw 6.5 7.6 16.6 15.9 30.3 3.8

TABLE II Cortex 2.7 3.0 5.67 5.2 9.9 2.0

Number of nodes and elements generated for each model.
Cancellous 0.44 0.47 0.7 0.92 0.67 0.37

Angle (deg) Storm

15 30 45 60 75 90 Screw 24.1 17.9 13.4 8 23.9 17.8

Thunder 95 88 102 84 63 92 Cortex 3.3 2.85 2.9 2.1 4.6 2.45

182 168 195 135 100 180 Cancellous 0.5 0.55 0.56 0.54 0.5 0.39

Jeil 98 87 93 105 85 87

188 140 137 155 135 145

Storm 106 107 109 137 105 115

TABLE IV
171 168 165 203 162 182 Deflection rate of miniscrew.

Angle (deg)

15 30 45 60 75 90
the cancellous and cortical bones (von Mises stress) at different Thunder
angles were recorded by a 3D finite element analysis program.
Screw 19.45 21 26.5 48 135 16.2

Jeil
Results Screw 7.73 7.8 14.5 14.2 88.3 4.5
Numeric findings of the von Mises stress distributions in cortical
Storm
and cancellous bones are shown in table III. The finite element
analysis showed the lowest amount of cancellous bone stress in Screw 10.3 11.3 10.9 14.75 45.1 0.88

angles of 908 for Jeil and Storm, which was 0.37 and 0.39 MPa
respectively, and 158 for Thunder, which was 0.85 MPa. The
maximum von Mises stresses in cancellous bone was seen in
Thunder miniscrew at 908 and 308, which was 1.3 MPa and
0.98 MPa respectively.
The maximum von Mises stresses in miniscrew was seen in
Thunder miniscrew at 758, which was 32.3 MPa. Jeil had the
lowest von Mises stresses in miniscrew at 908, which was
3.8 MPa.
Jeil showed the lowest von Mises stresses in 908 at miniscrew,
cortical and cancellous bone which was 3.8, 2, and 0.37 MPa
respectively. The least deflection rate was seen in Jeil at 908
which was 4.5 micrometre and Thunder had the Max Deforma-
tion at 758 which was 135 micrometres. The amount of deflec-
tion rate of miniscrews can be seen in table IV.
506
Discussion
In this study, finite element models were generated; orthodon-
tic loading for retraction was simulated and maximum stress
patterns generated by the miniscrews at the bone-miniscrew
interface were evaluated under different insertion angulations
158 308, 458, 608, 758 and 908 by using the 3D finite element
method. Finite element analysis is a computerized numeric
method, which is used to characterize both the deformation
and the 3D stress distribution in bodies that are exposed to
stress. This study showed that Jeil had the lowest amount of
stress in cancellous bone at 908. The success rate of the stability
of a miniscrew is essentially determined by the system in which

tome 18 > n83 > September 2020

The ideal insertion angle after immediate loading in Jeil, Storm, and Thunder miniscrews: A 3D-FEM study
the mechanical stresses are transported from the miniscrew to
the cortical and cancellous bone without generating forces of a
magnitude that would endanger the durability of the miniscrew
[10].
Very high stress concentrations in the surrounding bones can
result in loosening of the miniscrew [11]. When stress in the
bone is less than the standard yield strength, all the deforma-
tions are elastic and reversible with no yield strength at any
point; thus, no shift would occur in the Miniscrew. The standard
yield strength in cortical bone is 140 MPa [12]. The amount of
stress in cortical bone in this study is less than the normal
140 MPa, therefore there is no loosening seen in the minis-
crews. However, in Jeil miniscrews with a 90-degree angle
application, the distance between stress level and yield strength
is the maximum, in other words, it has the least amount of stress
in the cortical bone, so it is advisable to use this miniscrew with
an angle of 90 degrees to reduce loosening.
Many factors have been stated to influence miniscrew stability,
including insertion angle [13], diameter of miniscrew [14],
surface treatment [15], design of mini implant (tapered or
cylindrical) [16], thickness of cortical bone [17,18], insertion
site [19] and quality of bone [20]. Nienkemper et al. also
reported that different insertion angles did not affect the level
of deflection [22]. Chatzigianni et al. [21] also observed no
significant differences regarding size of miniscrew for low forces
(< 0.5 N). Sfondrini et al. [23] found that there were no signifi-
cant differences between 1.6 and 1.7 mm screws. Scribante
et al. reported no significant differences between titanium
and stainless steel miniscrews of equal diameters [24].
Woodall et al. [25] found that in a finite element model, the
stability of miniscrews placed at 908 degrees was largely greater
than that of screws placed at either 608 or 308. Similarly, Jasmine
[13] showed that placement of screws at a 908 decreases the
stress concentration, thereby increasing the stability. Zhao et al.
[26] and Wilmes et al. [4] also reported that oblique insertion of
miniscrews provides slightly greater stability. Similarly Poorsatar
showed that the angulation of 308 provides less stress in sup-
porting bone and has the largest stability [27]. Numerous factors
have revealed the success rate of miniscrews. Manni et al. [28]
found that success rate was better in male patients. It has been
reported that patient's age (older than 15 years) and operator's
skill has a major role in the stability of miniscrews in the palatal
tome 18 > n83 > September 2020
Original Article
area [29]. Diameter has an important parameter for stability in a
way that too small a diameter also enhances the risk of screw
loosening. Another decisive factor is the thickness of the cortical
bone [30]. The modulus of elasticity of cortical bone is higher
than trabecular bone that is why cortical bone is more resistant
to deformation. Therefore, cortical bone will bear more load
than trabecular bone in clinical situations [31].
Deguchi showed that insertion angle of 308 would enhance the
contact of miniscrew with bone as much as 1.5 times and
provide better stability. The smaller the angle, the greater the
cortical bone contact to the mini-implant in both jaws [32].
There are some limitations to this study that should be taken
into consideration when interpreting the data. The diameter and
length of the miniscrews were not the same. However, this
limitation is not a crucial problem because this study showed
that there is not an ideal insertion for all miniscrews. It seems
that each miniscrew has an ideal insertion angle according to its
diameter and length and other material properties. Another
limitation is that this study is a simplified geometry of the bone
model. Although the bone block is similar to the jaw bone, the
strain patterns might vary with the bone geometry. Thus, further
in vivo researches are required to achieve more accurate results.
Conclusions
Maximum von Mises stress distributions were less than the yield
strength limits of cancellous bone, cortical bone and miniscrew.
These findings showed that the Storm, Thunder, and Jeil min-
iscrews could safely resist a 200-gram horizontal retraction
force.
This study showed that the ideal insertion angle was 908 for Jeil
and for Storm, but 158 for Thunder, which offers the lowest
transmitted stress in surrounding cancellous bone.
Funding: The authors note that they did not receive any specific grants or
funding from a commercial firm or other outside entities.
Acknowledgements: We thank the Jeil Medical corporation and Kristal S.r.
l. for guidance regarding the information about property of Jeil, Storm and
Thunder miniscrews respectively.
Disclosure of interest: the authors declare that they have no competing
interest.
507
 M. Cozzani, L. Nucci, D. Lupini, H. Dolatshahizand, D. Fazeli, E. Barzkar, et al.
Original Article
References
[1] Becker K, Unland J, Wilmes B, Tarraf NE,
Drescher D. Is there an ideal insertion angle
and position for orthodontic mini-implants in
the anterior palate? A CBCT study in humans.
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2019;156:345–
54.
[2] Costa A, Raffainl M, Melsen B. Miniscrews as
orthodontic anchorage: a preliminary report.
Int J Adult Orthodon Orthognath Surg
1998;13:201–9.
[3] Perillo L, Jamilian A, Shafieyoon A, Karimi H,
Cozzani M. Finite element analysis of minis-
crew placement in mandibular alveolar bone
with varied angulations. Eur J Orthod
2015;37:56–9.
[4] Wilmes B, Su YY, Drescher D. Insertion angle
impact on primary stability of orthodontic mini-
implants. Angle Orthod 2008;78:1065–70.
[5] Cozzani M, Azizi A, Eslami S, Darnahal A,
Pirhadirad A, Jamilian A. 3-dimensional finite
element analysis of the outcomes of Alexan-
der, Gianelly, Roth and MBT bracket prescrip-
tion. Int Orthod 2019;17:45–52.
[6] Vollmer D, Bourauel C, Maier K, Jager A.
Determination of the centre of resistance in
an upper human canine and idealized tooth
model. Eur J Orthod 1999;21:633–48.
[7] Reimann S, Keilig L, Jager A, Bourauel C.
Biomechanical finite-element investigation of
the position of the centre of resistance of the
upper incisors. Eur J Orthod 2007;29:219–24.
[8] Cornelis MA, Scheffler NR, De Clerck HJ,
Tulloch JF, Behets CN. Systematic review
of the experimental use of temporary skeletal
anchorage devices in orthodontics. Am J
Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2007;131:S52–8.
[9] Singh S, Mogra S, Shetty VS, Shetty S, Philip
P. Three-dimensional finite element analysis
of strength, stability, and stress distribution in
orthodontic anchorage: a conical, self-drilling
miniscrew implant system. Am J Orthod Den-
tofacial Orthop 2012;141:327–36.
[10] Skalak R. Biomechanical considerations in
osseointegrated prostheses. J Prosthet Dent
1983;49:843–8.
[11] Gedrange T, Bourauel C, Kobel C, Harzer W.
Three-dimensional analysis of endosseous
palatal implants and bones after vertical, hor-
izontal, and diagonal force application. Eur J
Orthod 2003;25:109–15.
508
[12] Wolfram U, Schwiedrzik J. Post-yield and
failure properties of cortical bone. Bonekey
Rep 2016;5:829.
[13] Jasmine MI, Yezdani AA, Tajir F, Venu RM.
Analysis of stress in bone and microimplants
during en-masse retraction of maxillary and
mandibular anterior teeth with different
insertion angulations: a 3-dimensional finite
element analysis study. Am J Orthod Dento-
facial Orthop 2012;141:71–80.
[14] Lim SA, Cha JY, Hwang CJ. Insertion torque of
orthodontic miniscrews according to changes
in shape, diameter and length. Angle Orthod
2008;78:234–40.
[15] Cho YC, Cha JY, Hwang CJ, Park YC, Jung HS,
Yu HS. Biologic stability of plasma ion-
implanted miniscrews. Korean J Orthod
2013;43:120–6.
[16] Katic V, Kamenar E, Blazevic D, Spalj S.
Geometrical design characteristics of orthodon-
tic mini-implants predicting maximum inser-
tion torque. Korean J Orthod 2014;44:177–83.
[17] Kim JH, Park YC. Evaluation of mandibular
cortical bone thickness for placement of tem-
porary anchorage devices (TADs). Korean J
Orthod 2012;42:110–7.
[18] Nucera R, Lo Giudice A, Bellocchio AM, et al.
Bone and cortical bone thickness of mandib-
ular buccal shelf for mini-screw insertion in
adults. Angle Orthod 2017;87:745–51.
[19] Kim JS, Choi SH, Cha SK, et al. Comparison of
success rates of orthodontic mini-screws by
the insertion method. Korean J Orthod
2012;42:242–8.
[20] Liu TS, Gao R, Wei T, Sun HQ. Three-
dimensional finite element analysis of the
stress distribution of bone tissue around por-
ous titanium implant. Zhonghua Kou Qiang Yi
Xue Za Zhi 2019;54:35–40.
[21] Chatzigianni A, Keilig L, Duschner H, Gotz H,
Eliades T, Bourauel C. Comparative analysis of
numerical and experimental data of ortho-
dontic mini-implants. Eur J Orthod
2011;33:468–75.
[22] Nienkemper M, Handschel J, Drescher D.
Systematic review of mini-implant displace-
ment under orthodontic loading. Int J Oral Sci
2014;6:1–6.
[23] Sfondrini MF, Gandini P, Alcozer R, Vallittu PK,
Scribante A. Failure load and stress analysis of
orthodontic miniscrews with different trans-
mucosal collar diameter. J Mech Behav
Biomed Mater 2018;87:132–7.
[24] Scribante A, Montasser MA, Radwan ES,
et al. Reliability of orthodontic miniscrews:
bending and maximum load of different Ti-
6Al-4V titanium and stainless steel temporary
anchorage devices (TADs). Materials (Basel)
2018;11(7):1138. http://dx.doi.org/
10.3390/ma11071138.
[25] Woodall N, Tadepalli SC, Qian F, Grosland
NM, Marshall SD, Southard TE. Effect of
miniscrew angulation on anchorage resis-
tance. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop
2011;139:e147–52.
[26] Zhao L, Xu Z, Wei X, et al. Effect of placement
angle on the stability of loaded titanium
microscrews: a microcomputed tomographic
and biomechanical analysis. Am J Orthod Den-
tofacial Orthop 2011;139:628–35.
[27] Poorsattar Bejeh Mir A, Ravadgar M, Poor-
sattar Bejeh Mir M. Optimized orthodontic
palatal miniscrew implant insertion angula-
tion: a finite element analysis. Int J Oral Max-
illofac Implants 2015;30:e1–9.
[28] Manni A, Cozzani M, Tamborrino F, De Rinaldis
S, Menini A. Factors influencing the stability of
miniscrews. A retrospective study on 300 min-
iscrews. Eur J Orthod 2011;33:388–95.
[29] Kim YH, Yang SM, Kim S, et al. Midpalatal
miniscrews for orthodontic anchorage: factors
affecting clinical success. Am J Orthod Dento-
facial Orthop 2010;137:66–72.
[30] Buchter A, Wiechmann D, Koerdt S, Wies-
mann HP, Piffko J, Meyer U. Load-related
implant reaction of mini-implants used for
orthodontic anchorage. Clin Oral Implants
Res 2005;16:473–9.
[31] Sevimay M, Turhan F, Kilicarslan MA, Eski-
tascioglu G. Three-dimensional finite ele-
ment analysis of the effect of different
bone quality on stress distribution in an
implant-supported crown. J Prosthet Dent
2005;93:227–34.
[32] Deguchi T, Nasu M, Murakami K, Yabuuchi T,
Kamioka H, Takano-Yamamoto T. Quantita-
tive evaluation of cortical bone thickness with
computed tomographic scanning for ortho-
dontic implants. Am J Orthod Dentofacial
Orthop 2006;129:721e7–721e12.
tome 18 > n83 > September 2020