## 3 Results
### Main Study Outcome
When MIT, PTV (immediately after placement and 6 months after placement) values were analyzed, the acid-etched and machined surface treatments showed similar primary and secondary stability. [PERSON] et al. [40] also compared the stability of acid-etched and machined surface miniscrews in their animal study. They also evaluated the effect of force on these two different surfaces. High MIT and reduced PTV were observed in all groups, as well as a reduction in MRT in comparison with MIT. Whether force was applied or not, there were no significant differences in PTV, MIT or MRT in any of the groups. [PERSON] et al. [37] compared anodized surfaces and machined surfaces in their study. Both \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{p{56.9 pt} p{56.9 pt} p{56.9 pt} p{56.9 pt} p{56.9 pt}} \hline
**Author/Year** & **Design of Miniscrew** & **Insertion Sites** & **Measurement of Stability** & **Results** \\ \hline  & & & & CG1 \\  & & & & MIT: 19.20 \(\pm\) 1.64 Ncm & \\  & & & PTV-I: 0.40 \(\pm\) 1.51 & \\  & & & MRT: 2.60 \(\pm\) 0.89 Ncm & \\  & & & PTV-F: 13.60 \(\pm\) 6.94 & \\  & & & & C2 \\  & & & & MIT: 18.00 \(\pm\) 1.19 Ncm & \\  & & & PTV-I & \(-\)0.06 \(\pm\) 2.67 & \\  & & & MIT & MRT: 2.75 \(\pm\) 0.70 Ncm & \\  & & & & PTV-F: 14.56 \(\pm\) 4.71 & \\  & & & PTV-I & TG1 & \\  & & & & \\  & & & & PTV-F: 19.00 \(\pm\) 3.31 Ncm & \\  & & & & PTV-I: 0.30 \(\pm\) 1.09 & \\  & & & & MRT: 4.00 \(\pm\) 1.00 Ncm & \\  & & & & PTV-F: 8.70 \(\pm\) 10.42 & \\  & & & & TG2 \\  & & & & MIT: 15.90 \(\pm\) 2.68 Ncm & \\  & & & & PTV-I & \(-\)0.20 \(\pm\) 2.74 \\  & & & & MRT: 4.10 \(\pm\) 1.52 Ncm & \\  & & & & PTV-F: 7.90 \(\pm\) 8.02 & \\  & & & & & CG \\  & & & & & MIT: 12.42 \(\pm\) 5.755 Ncm & \\  & & & & MRT: 8.08 \(\pm\) 2.481 Ncm & \\  & & & & MRT & TG \\  & & & & MRT: 12.10 \(\pm\) 6.295 Ncm & \\  & & & & MRT: 15.71 \(\pm\) 5.563 Ncm & \\ \hline  & & & & & With/without force during \\  & & & & & 12 weeks \\  & & & & No differences between \\  & & & & & with and without force in \\  & & & & most groups. MRT \\  & & & & increased within time. With \\  & & & & & force, MRT of TG1 \\  & & & & increased at 4 weeks, while \\  & & & & TG2 & showed the highest \\  & & & & MRT after 8 weeks. & \\ \hline  & & & & & CG1 \\  & & & & MRT: 50.50 \(\pm\) 14.37 Ncm & \\  & & & & CG2 \\  & & & & CG \\  & & & & MRT: 48.25 \(\pm\) 15.07 Ncm & \\  & & & & TG1 \\  & & & & MRT: 90.88 \(\pm\) 35.71 Ncm & \\  & & & MRT: 79.13 \(\pm\) 11.46 Ncm & \\ \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 2: _Cont._groups were subjected to force loading and no significant differences were found in the MIT and MRT values measured at week 3 and week 12. In the remaining 14 studies, differences were found between the stability of the machined surface and other surface treatments [27; 28; 30; 33; 34; 35; 36; 38; 39; 41; 42; 43]. Unlike other acid-etched studies, [PERSON] et al. [33] immersed miniscrews with acid-etched surfaces in calcium chloride solution. At 1 week after insertion, miniscrews with acid-etched surfaces showed higher MRT values than the control group, whether or not they were immersed in calcium chloride solution. At 4 and 7 weeks, the acid-etched group immersed in calcium chloride solution had the highest MRT value. [PERSON] et al. [30] found the MRT values of grit-blasted and grit-blasted + acid-etched surfaces significantly higher than acid-etched and machined surfaces. [PERSON] et al. [41] compared SAE-treated surfaces and machined surfaces in their human study. Although the MIT values of these two different surfaces were similar, the MRT value of the SAE surface group was found to be higher. [PERSON] et al. [43] also compared SAE and machined surfaces. In addition, the effect of force on these surfaces was also evaluated. MRT was significantly higher for the machined surface in both the force and non-force groups than the SAE surface. Force did not significantly affect MRT for any surface or treatment. [PERSON] et al. [38] compared SLA and machined surfaces in their study.