SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Turkish Journal of Orthodontics / 2015 / Cilt: 28 - Sayı: 1

Dentofacial Morphology in Third Molar Agenesis

A Burcu ALTAN
E.Alper SİNANOĞLU
Ebru ÜÇDEMİR
Songul SANDALCİ
Ali İhya KARAMAN
Pages
7–12
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)

Statistical significance was set at p,0.05.Results: When the agenesis groups (groups I, II, and III) were compared with the control group, it was found that all parametersrepresenting the anteroposterior dimensions of both jaws (A-Ptm, CoA, ANS-PNS, CoB, CoGn, CoPog, and ABRB) weresignificantly smaller in all agenesis groups (p,0.05).

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objective: In the literature, some studies show a relation between tooth agenesis and craniofacial morphology, whereas otherauthors conclude that dental agenesis exerts little influence on dent facial structures.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The objective of this study was to determinethe existence of any relation between bilateral agenesis of the maxillary and/or mandibular third molars and the anteroposteriordimensions and vertical growth pattern of the jaws.Subjects and Methods: Sixty-eight subjects between the ages of 13 and 17 years with bilateral agenesis of maxillary thirdmolars (group I, n=37), bilateral agenesis of the mandibular third molars (group II, n=19), and agenesis of all third molars (groupIII, n=12) as well as 33 subjects without third molar agenesis (group IV) were selected from the radiology archive.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Statistical significance was set at p,0.05.Results: When the agenesis groups (groups I, II, and III) were compared with the control group, it was found that all parametersrepresenting the anteroposterior dimensions of both jaws (A-Ptm, CoA, ANS-PNS, CoB, CoGn, CoPog, and ABRB) weresignificantly smaller in all agenesis groups (p,0.05).
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2015 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Objective: In the literature, some studies show a relation between tooth agenesis and craniofacial morphology, whereas otherauthors conclude that dental agenesis exerts little influence on dent facial structures. The objective of this study was to determinethe existence of any relation between bilateral agenesis of the maxillary and/or mandibular third molars and the anteroposteriordimensions and vertical growth pattern of the jaws.Subjects and Methods: Sixty-eight subjects between the ages of 13 and 17 years with bilateral agenesis of maxillary thirdmolars (group I, n=37), bilateral agenesis of the mandibular third molars (group II, n=19), and agenesis of all third molars (groupIII, n=12) as well as 33 subjects without third molar agenesis (group IV) were selected from the radiology archive. A before andafter treatment orthopantomograph and the pretreatment cephalometric radiograph of the subjects were used. Several angularand linear parameters representing the anteroposterior dimensions and vertical growth pattern of the jaws were measured oncephalometric radiographs. The data were analyzed by Kolmogorov-Smirnov test, analysis of variance for 1 factor, andindependent-samples t test. Statistical significance was set at p,0.05.Results: When the agenesis groups (groups I, II, and III) were compared with the control group, it was found that all parametersrepresenting the anteroposterior dimensions of both jaws (A-Ptm, CoA, ANS-PNS, CoB, CoGn, CoPog, and ABRB) weresignificantly smaller in all agenesis groups (p,0.05). The parameters reflecting the vertical growth pattern did not represent anydifference among the groups (p.0.05).Conclusion: In subjects with bilateral or total third molar agenesis, the anteroposterior dimensions of both jaws were smaller incomparison with subjects without tooth agenesis. Vertical growth pattern of the jaws did not differ among the groups. (Turkish JOrthod 2015;28:7–12)

🔖

Cite This Article

ALTAN, A. B., SİNANOĞLU, E., ÜÇDEMİR, E., SANDALCİ, S., KARAMAN, A. İ. (2015). Dentofacial Morphology in Third Molar Agenesis. Turkish Journal of Orthodontics, Cilt: 28 - Sayı: 1, 7–12. https://ajindex.com/articles/375046

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (18)

  1. Mattheeuws N, Dermaut L, Martens G. Has hypodontia increased in Caucasians during the 20th century? A metaanalysis. Eur J Orthod. 2004;26: 99–103
  2. Flores-Mir C. Increased hypodontia through the twentieth century. Evid Based Dent. 2006;7(1):15
  3. Larmour CJ, Mossey PA, Thind BS, Stirrups DR. Hypodontia: a retrospective review of prevalence and etiology, Part I. Quint Int. 2005;36:263–270
  4. Tavajohi-Kermani H, Kapur R, Sciote J. Tooth agenesis and craniofacial morphology in an orthodontic population. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2002;122:39–47
  5. Gravely JF. A radiographic survey of third molar development. Br Dent J. 1965;119:397–401
  6. De Coster PJ, Marks LA, Martens LC, Huysseune A. Dental agenesis: genetic and clinical perspectives. Oral Pathol Med. 2009;38:1–17
  7. Kazanci F, Celikoglu M, Miloglu O, Oktay H. Third-molar agenesis among patients from the East Anatolian Region of Turkey. J Contemp Dent Pract. 2010;11(4):E33–E40 8. Nanda RS. Agenesis of the third molar in man. Am J Orthod. 1954;40:698–706
  8. Keene HJ. Third molar agenesis, spacing and crowding of teeth, and tooth size in caries-resistant naval recruits. Am J Orthod. 1964;50:445–451
  9. Baba-Kawano S, Toyoshima Y, Regalado L, Sa’do B, Nakasima A. Relationship between congenitally missing lower third molars and late formation of tooth germs. Angle Orthod. 2002;72:112–117
  10. Garn SM, Lewis AB, Vicinus JH. Third molar agenesis and reduction in number of other teeth. J Dent Res. 1962;41: 717
  11. Sarnas KV, Rune BJ. The facial profile in advanced hypodontia. A mixed longitudinal study of 141 children. Eur J Orthod. 1983;5:133–143
  12. Yuksel S, Uc¸em T. The effect of tooth agenesis on dentofacial structures. Eur J Orthod. 1997;19:133–143
  13. Barrachina C, Bravo A. Estudio de la morfologia craneofacial en individuos con agenesia dentaria. Rev Esp Ortod. 1990;20:229–236
  14. Ogaard B, Krogstad O. Craniofacial structure and soft tissue profile in patients with severe hypodontia. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 1995;108:472–477
  15. Kawanishi H. Statistical survey of third molars in Japanese. J Stomatol Soc Jpn. 1959;26:463–478
  16. Sanchez MJ, Vicente A, Bravo LA. Third molar agenesis and craniofacial morphology. Angle Orthod. 2009;79:473– 478
  17. Kajii T, Sato Y, Kajii S, Sugawara Y, Iida J. Agenesis of third molar germs depends on sagittal maxillary jaw dimension in orthodontic patient in Japan. Angle Orthod. 2004;74:337– 342
  18. Ades AG, Joondeph DR, Little RM, Chapko MK. A lon