Journals / Ege Üniversitesi Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi / 2017 / Cilt: 38 - Sayı: 3

Comparison of Skeletal And Dental Transversal Maxillary Dimensions Between Various Malocclusions

Maksiller İskeletsel ve Dişsel Transversal Yön Boyutlarının Farklı Malokluzyon Grupları Arasında Karşılaştırılarak Değerlendirilmesi

Pages
151–157
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

CONCLUSION: Skeletal and dental transversal dimensions were similar between sagittal anomalies with mild to moderate severity.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to evaluate the maxillary skeletal and dentoalveoler transversal widths in class I, class II and class III malocclusions using cone beam computed tomography (CBCT).
📊
Key Findings & Data:METHODS: The CBCT images of 68 patients (30 female, 38 male) with 25 skeletal class 1 (0 <= ANB <= 4), 22 skeletal class 2 (4 <= ANB) and 21 skeletal class 3 (0 >= ANB) were included.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:CONCLUSION: Skeletal and dental transversal dimensions were similar between sagittal anomalies with mild to moderate severity.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to evaluate the maxillary skeletal and dentoalveoler transversal widths in class I, class II and class III malocclusions using cone beam computed tomography (CBCT). METHODS: The CBCT images of 68 patients (30 female, 38 male) with 25 skeletal class 1 (0 <= ANB <= 4), 22 skeletal class 2 (4 <= ANB) and 21 skeletal class 3 (0 >= ANB) were included. Maxillary base width, maxillary alveolar width, distance between maxillary first molars, palatal base width, palatal alveolar width, the angulation of right and left maxillar first molars were measured using Mimics Software (Materialise, Ann Arbor, Mich). One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA), Krıuskall Wallis and Wilcoxon Signed Rank test were used for statistical evaluations. RESULTS: The highest difference for maxillary skeletal width was between class I and class II groups as 0.68 mm (p=0,675). Although it was not statistically significant, the mean difference between class I and class III groups was 4.46 mm (95% GA, -4.26 mm, 13.10 mm). This difference was 2.92 mm (95% GA, 5.57 mm, 11.43 mm) between class II and class III groups. CONCLUSION: Skeletal and dental transversal dimensions were similar between sagittal anomalies with mild to moderate severity.

Özet

AMAÇ: Bu çalışmanın amacı; konik ışınlı bilgisayarlı tomografi (KIBT) görüntüleri üzerinde iskeletsel ve dişsel maksiller yatay yön boyutlarının iskeletsel sınıf I, Sınıf II ve sınıf III gruplarında incelenerek karşılaştırılmasıdır. YÖNTEM: Çalışmanın materyalini; 25 iskeletsel sınıf I (0 ANB) ilişkisi olan 30 kadın 38 erkek olmak üzere toplam 68 hastaya ait KIBT görüntüleri oluşturmaktadır. Bütün görüntüler Mimics (Materialise, Ann Arbor, Mich) yazılımına aktarılarak maksiller bazal genişlik, maksiller alveoler genişlik, maksiller 1. molar dişler arası genişlik, palatinal kemik kaide genişliği, palatina alveoler genişlik ve 1.molar dişlerin bukkolingual eksen eğimleri ölçülmüştür. İstatistiksel değerlendirmeler için tek yönlü varyans analizi (ANOVA), Kruskal Wallis analizi ve Wilcoxon işaretli sıralar testi yapılmıştır. BULGULAR: Maksiller bazal genişlik için gruplar arasındaki en yüksek fark sınıf I ve sınıf II grupları arasında ve 0,68 (p=0,675) mm'dir. İstatistiksel olarak anlamsız olsa da, sınıf 1 ve sınıf III grupları arasındaki ortalama farkın 4,46 mm (%95 GA; -4,26 mm, 13,10 mm) olduğu görülmüştür. Bu fark sınıf II ile sınıf III grupları arasında ortalama 2,92 mm (%95 GA; -5,57 mm, 11,43 mm) olarak bulunmuştur. SONUÇ: İskeletsel ve dişsel transversal boyutların, orta ya da hafif şiddetteki sagittal yön anomalilerinde benzer özellikler gösterdiği bulunmuştur.

🔖

Cite This Article

DİNDAROĞLU, F., DURAN, G. S. (2017). Comparison of Skeletal And Dental Transversal Maxillary Dimensions Between Various Malocclusions. Ege Üniversitesi Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi, Cilt: 38 - Sayı: 3, 151–157. https://ajindex.com/articles/154275

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (15)

  1. McNamara JA, Brudon WL, Kokich VG. Orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics. Needham Press; 2001
  2. Dellinger EL. A preliminary study of anterior maxillary displacement. Am J Orthod 1973;63:509-16
  3. Starnbach H, Bayne D, Cleall J, Subtelny JD. Facioskeletal and dental changes resulting from rapid maxillary expansion. Angle Orthod 1966;36:152-64
  4. Hajeer M, Millett D, Ayoub A, Siebert J. Current Products and Practices: Applications of 3D imaging in orthodontics: Part I. J Orthod 2004;31:62-70
  5. Hajeer M, Millett D, Ayoub A, Siebert J. Current Products and Practices: Applications of 3D imaging in orthodontics: Part II. J Orthod 2004;31:154-62
  6. Scarfe WC, Farman AG, Sukovic P. Clinical applications of cone-beam computed tomography in dental practice. J Can Dent Assoc 2006;72:75
  7. American Association of Orthodontists. Statement on the role of CBCT in orthodontics (26-10 H). eBulletin; May 7, 2010. Available at: www.aaomembers.org/Resources/Publications/ebulleti n- 05-06-10.cfm. Accessed on January 20, 2012
  8. Farman AG, Scarfe WC. Development of imaging selection criteria and procedures should precede cephalometric assessment with cone-beam computed tomography. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2006;130:257-65
  9. Lee K-M, Hwang H-S, Cho J-H. Comparison of transverse analysis between posteroanterior cephalogram and cone-beam computed tomography. Angle Orthod 2013;84:715-19
  10. Franchi L, Baccetti T. Transverse maxillary deficiency in Class II and Class III malocclusions: a cephalometric and morphometric study onpostero-anterior films. Orthod Craniofac Res 2005;8:21-28
  11. Sayin MO, Turkkahraman H. Comparison of dental arch and alveolar widths of patients with Class II, division 1 malocclusion and subjects with Class I ideal occlusion. Angle Orthod 2004;74:356-60
  12. Uysal T, Memili B, Usumez S, Sari Z. Dental and alveolar arch widths in normal occlusion, class II division 1 and class II division 2. Angle Orthod 2005;75:941-47
  13. Uysal T, Usumez S, Memili B, Sari Z. Dental and alveolar arch widths in normal occlusion and Class III malocclusion. Angle Orthod 2005;75:809-13
  14. Chen F, Terada K, Yang L, Saito I. Dental arch widths and mandibular-maxillary base widths in Class III malocclusions from ages 10 to 14. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2008;133:65-69
  15. Slaj M, Spalj S, Pavlin D, Illes D, Slaj M. Dental archforms in dentoalveolar Class I, II and III. Angle Orthod 2010;80:919-24