INTRODUCTION: Posterior open bite has several possible causes, including primary failure of eruption (PFE) that affects all teeth distal to the most mesial involved tooth, mechanical failure of eruption (MFE) (primarily ankylosis) that affects only the involved tooth or teeth, and soft-tissue interferences with eruption (other). METHODS: Radiographs and other clinical records for 97 cases of failure of posterior eruption submitted for consultation were analyzed to further characterize PFE and distinguish it from MFE. RESULTS: Of the 97 cases, 38 were judged to be clear-cut PFE; 19 were diagnosed as MFE; 32 were classified as indeterminate failure because they were too young to be certain of the distinction between PFE and MFE; and 8 were placed in the "other" category. Two subtypes of PFE were observed. In type 1, eruption failure occurred at or near the same time for all teeth in an affected quadrant. In type 2, a gradient of the time of failure was present, so that some further development of the teeth posterior to the most mesial affected tooth was observed before eruption failure. A family history of eruption problems was noted in 10 of the 38 PFE subjects (26%), and a pedigree analysis was done for 4 families. This was consistent with autosomal dominant transmission. CONCLUSIONS: The distinction between PFE and MFE is clinically important because it determines whether all posterior teeth, or only individual affected teeth, will not respond to orthodontic force. Certain diagnosis often requires progress radiographs so that the pattern of eruption of teeth distal to the most mesial affected tooth can be observed.
INTRODUCTION: Posterior open bite has several possible causes, including primary failure of eruption (PFE) that affects all teeth distal to the most mesial involved tooth, mechanical failure of eruption (MFE) (primarily ankylosis) that affects only the involved tooth or teeth, and soft-tissue interferences with eruption (other). METHODS: Radiographs and other clinical records for 97 cases of failure of posterior eruption submitted for consultation were analyzed to further characterize PFE and distinguish it from MFE. RESULTS: Of the 97 cases, 38 were judged to be clear-cut PFE; 19 were diagnosed as MFE; 32 were classified as indeterminate failure because they were too young to be certain of the distinction between PFE and MFE; and 8 were placed in the "other" category. Two subtypes of PFE were observed. In type 1, eruption failure occurred at or near the same time for all teeth in an affected quadrant. In type 2, a gradient of the time of failure was present, so that some further development of the teeth posterior to the most mesial affected tooth was observed before eruption failure. A family history of eruption problems was noted in 10 of the 38 PFE subjects (26%), and a pedigree analysis was done for 4 families. This was consistent with autosomal dominant transmission. CONCLUSIONS: The distinction between PFE and MFE is clinically important because it determines whether all posterior teeth, or only individual affected teeth, will not respond to orthodontic force. Certain diagnosis often requires progress radiographs so that the pattern of eruption of teeth distal to the most mesial affected tooth can be observed.
Authors: Helmut Roth; Lars G Fritsche; Christoph Meier; Peter Pilz; Martin Eigenthaler; Philipp Meyer-Marcotty; Angelika Stellzig-Eisenhauer; Peter Proff; Cláudia M Kanno; Bernhard Hf Weber Journal: Clin Oral Investig Date: 2013-06-15 Impact factor: 3.573
Authors: P Pilz; P Meyer-Marcotty; M Eigenthaler; H Roth; B H F Weber; A Stellzig-Eisenhauer Journal: J Orofac Orthop Date: 2014-05-15 Impact factor: 1.938
Authors: S A Frazier-Bowers; H M Hendricks; J T Wright; J Lee; K Long; C F Dibble; S Bencharit Journal: J Dent Res Date: 2013-12-03 Impact factor: 6.116