Results:It was found that the prevalence of buccal undercuts in different regions ranged from 74% to 84% on average.
📌 3 Key Takeaways
🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Aim: The aim of this study was to investigate of the relation between the alveolar ridge dimensions and buccal undercut in the anterior maxilla.Material and Methods:Cone-beam computed tomography images of 150 patients (97 females, 53 males), aged between 16-40 years having full anterior dentition at the maxilla were evaluated.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Results:It was found that the prevalence of buccal undercuts in different regions ranged from 74% to 84% on average.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Comparedto males, the presence of buccal undercut was found to be significantly higher in females in the regions of between right lateral-canine teeth, left central-lateral teeth and left lateral-canine teeth (p
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters
Abstract
Aim: The aim of this study was to investigate of the relation between the alveolar ridge dimensions and buccal undercut in the anterior maxilla.Material and Methods:Cone-beam computed tomography images of 150 patients (97 females, 53 males), aged between 16-40 years having full anterior dentition at the maxilla were evaluated. Six-hundred cross-sectional images were obtained from the regions between central, lateral and canine teeth in the right and left maxilla. The alveolar height and width, and the presence and depth of buccal undercut in these regions were assessed. Results:It was found that the prevalence of buccal undercuts in different regions ranged from 74% to 84% on average. Comparedto males, the presence of buccal undercut was found to be significantly higher in females in the regions of between right lateral-canine teeth, left central-lateral teeth and left lateral-canine teeth (p
🔖
Cite This Article
YILDIZ, F. N., AKARSLAN, Z. Z. (2022). IS THERE A RELATION BETWEEN ALVEOLAR RIDGE DIMENSIONS AND BUCCAL UNDERCUT IN THE ANTERIOR MAXILLA?≠. Atatürk Üniversitesi Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi Dergisi, Cilt: 30 - Sayı: 2, 174–180. https://ajindex.com/articles/451636
Consolaro A, Romano FL. Reasons for mini-implants failure: choosing installation site should be valued!. Dental Press J Orthod. 2014
Zhang W, Skrypczak A, Weltman R. Anterior maxilla alveolar ridge dimension and morphology measurement by cone beam computerized tomography (CBCT) for immediate implant treatment planning. BMC Oral Health 2015
Shapurian T, Damoulis PD, Reiser GM, Griffin TJ, Rand WM. Quantitative evaluation of bone density using the Hounsfield index. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2006
Almasoud NN, Tanneru N, Marei HF. Alveolar bone density and its clinical implication in the placement of dental implants and orthodontic mini-implants. SaudiMedJ 2016
Cassetta M, Sofan AAA, Altieri F, Barbato E. Evaluation of alveolar corticalbone thickness and density for orthodontic mini-implant placement. J Clin Exp Dent 2016
e245-52. 6.Hiasa K, Abe Y, Okazaki Y, Nogami K, Mizumachi W, Akagawa Y. Preoperative computed tomography-derived bone densities in Hounsfield Units at implant sites acquired primary stability. ISRN Dent 2011, Article ID 678729. 7.Hao Y, Zhao W, Wang Y, Yu J, Zou D. Assessments of jaw bone density at implant sites using 3D cone-beam computed tomography. Eur RevMed Pharmacol Sci 2014
Fuh L-J, Huang H-L, Chen C-S, Fu K-L, Shen Y-W, Tu M-G, Shen W-C, Hsu J-T. Variations in bone density at dental implant sites in different regionsof the jawbone. J Oral Rehabil2010
51 9.Kim H-J, Yu S-K, Lee M-H, Lee H-J, Kim H-J, Chung C-H. Cortical and cancellous bone thickness on the anterior region of alveolar bone in Korean: a study of dentate human cadavers. JAdv Prosthodont 2012
Ozdemir F, Tozlu M, Germec Cakan D. Quantitative evaluation of alveolar cortical bone density in adults with different vertical facial types using cone-beam computed tomography. Korean J Orthod2014
Çakur B, Sümbüllü MA, Harorlı A. Operasyon öncesi implant yerlerinin belirlenmesinde radyolojik kriterler ve radyolojik teknik seçimi. J DentFac Atatürk Uni 2007
Harris D, Buser D, Dula K, Gröndahl K, Harris D, Jacobs R, Lekholm U, Nakielny R, van Steenberghe D, van der Stelt P. EAO Guidelines for the use of Diagnostic Imaging in Implant Dentistry: A consensus workshop organized by the European Association for Osseointegration in Trinity CollegeDublin. Clin Oral Implants Res2002
White SC, Pharoah M.J. Oral Radiology Principles and Interpretation. 7 st ed