## 1 Introduction  
### Rationale  
In recent years, miniscrews temporarily implanted in alveolar bone have often been used to enhance skeletal anchorage during orthodontic treatment. Situations where patient cooperation is lacking, or adequate anchorage cannot be achieved with traditional extra-oral appliances, result in treatment disruptions [1, 2]. Because of such disadvantages, miniscrews were introduced in the 1990s for use in orthodontic treatments [3]. Miniscrews are advantageous because they require minimal patient cooperation, are easy to apply, and are less costly than dental implants [4]. Miniscrews are used both for light and continuous (orthodontic) force applications and for heavy dynamic and rotational (orthopedic) force applications [5]. Therefore, it is important that they remain stable throughout treatment. Over the years, it has been revealed that the main advantage of using miniscrews is a reduction in anchorage loss. The most common complication is root injury in the interadicular area during placement [6]. Miniscrews have excellent mechanical properties and an acceptable failure rate, even when orthopedic appliances are used [7, 8]. Despite its limited biocompatibility and low resistance to corrosion, the Ti-6 Al-4V alloy has been used extensively for orthodontic miniscrews. While this substitution successfully addresses concerns related to mechanical strength, it adversely affects the osseointegration process [9].  
Primary stability is the absence of mobility between implant and bone [10, 11]. Mechanical locking occurs between the bone and implant depending on the characteristicsof the implant, bone quality and quantity, and implantation techniques [12; 13; 14]. Studies have emphasized that sufficient primary stability is necessary in order to apply orthodontic forces on miniscrews [15; 16]. If primary stability cannot be achieved, the desired healing around the screw cannot take place, resulting in premature screw loss [15]. Secondary stability is the stability provided as the bone structure forms around the miniscrew during the healing process [17]. The degree of primary stability formed after miniscrew implantation affects the successful development of secondary stability [18]. In a study evaluating implant stability, [PERSON] et al. reported that primary stability decreases and secondary stability increases after the implants are placed, and osseointegration occurs around the miniscrew as secondary stability increases [17].  
Their small size reduces both root injury and the risk of damage to surrounding tissues, and also enables them to be used in many regions of the maxilla and mandible [3; 19]. However, in situations requiring prolonged anchorage, due to the limited surface area and reduced bone contact of miniscrews, the success rate may decrease despite their advantages. Some studies have reported that miniscrews also exhibit partial osseointegration [20; 21]. For this reason, strategies to accelerate the osseointegration of miniscrews are being developed to increase their survival rate [5; 22]. These strategies involve changing the surface topography by roughening the miniscrew surface. Roughening at the microscopic level increases the surface area and mechanical locking, thereby improving stability [23]. However, surface etching processes at the nanoscopic level increase surface energy, matrix protein absorption, and the migration and proliferation of bone cells in the area, resulting in a stronger bone-implant bond [24]. These strategies include efforts such as acid etching; ultraviolet (UV) treatment; anodization; sandblasting with large grit and acid etching (SLA); sandblasting, large-grit, and anodic oxidation (SLAO); resorbable blasting media (RBM); and grit blasting (Figure 1) [25; 26; 27; 28; 29; 30].  
Figure 1: Different surface treatments for orthodontic miniscrews.