Faruk I Ucar1, Ahmet A Celebi2, Enes Tan3, Tolga Topcuoğlu2, Ahmet Ercan Sekerci4. 1. Department of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Selçuk University, Konya, Turkey. 2. Department of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Zirve, Gaziantep, Turkey. 3. Department of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Kırıkkale University, Kurtulus Mahallesi, 692. Sokak, No. 31, Merkez, 71100, Kirikkale, Turkey. dentistan@yahoo.com. 4. Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, Faculty of Dentistry, Erciyes University, Kayseri, Turkey.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to analyze the amount of root resorption of maxillary lateral incisors by relating the position, location, and angulation of the impacted canine using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study sample consisted of panoramic and CBCT radiographs of 46 patients with a unilateral impacted canine (16 males and 30 females; mean age: 19.53 ± 6.66 and 19.44 ± 5.77 years, respectively). Sector location and canine angulation were measured in panoramics. All tomographs were obtained using CBCT (NewTom 5G, QR, Verona, Italy) and three-dimensional (3D) reconstructions of the maxillary laterals assessed by Mimics 14.01 image analysis software. RESULTS: Upper lateral incisor volume was smaller on the impacted side (401.95 ± 83.69 mm3) than on the nonimpacted side (433.54 ± 92.6 mm3, P < 0.05). There were no significant differences of lateral root resorption volume when comparing the impacted canines being on the labial or palatal sides (P > 0.05), but impacted canine angulation was significantly steeper on the labial side (70.85°) than on the palatal side (46.09°, P < 0.05). The volume of root resorption of laterals when comparing the various positions of the canine in different sectors or canine angulation in 30o intervals was not statistically significantly different (P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The impacted canines caused root resorption of lateral incisors. The angulation of the canine was steeper on the labial side than on the palatal side but root resorption of adjacent laterals was not different. There were no statistically significant differences in the amount of root resorption of the laterals when the canine was evaluated according to localization and angulation.
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to analyze the amount of root resorption of maxillary lateral incisors by relating the position, location, and angulation of the impacted canine using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study sample consisted of panoramic and CBCT radiographs of 46 patients with a unilateral impacted canine (16 males and 30 females; mean age: 19.53 ± 6.66 and 19.44 ± 5.77 years, respectively). Sector location and canine angulation were measured in panoramics. All tomographs were obtained using CBCT (NewTom 5G, QR, Verona, Italy) and three-dimensional (3D) reconstructions of the maxillary laterals assessed by Mimics 14.01 image analysis software. RESULTS: Upper lateral incisor volume was smaller on the impacted side (401.95 ± 83.69 mm3) than on the nonimpacted side (433.54 ± 92.6 mm3, P < 0.05). There were no significant differences of lateral root resorption volume when comparing the impacted canines being on the labial or palatal sides (P > 0.05), but impacted canine angulation was significantly steeper on the labial side (70.85°) than on the palatal side (46.09°, P < 0.05). The volume of root resorption of laterals when comparing the various positions of the canine in different sectors or canine angulation in 30o intervals was not statistically significantly different (P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The impacted canines caused root resorption of lateral incisors. The angulation of the canine was steeper on the labial side than on the palatal side but root resorption of adjacent laterals was not different. There were no statistically significant differences in the amount of root resorption of the laterals when the canine was evaluated according to localization and angulation.
Authors: V P D Westphalen; I Gomes de Moraes; F H Westphalen; W D Martins; P H Couto Souza Journal: Dentomaxillofac Radiol Date: 2004-07 Impact factor: 2.419
Authors: Caroline S Lai; Michael M Bornstein; Lothar Mock; Benjamin M Heuberger; Thomas Dietrich; Christos Katsaros Journal: Eur J Orthod Date: 2012-07-24 Impact factor: 3.075
Authors: Israa Hussein Ali; Bassam Ali Al-Turaihi; Lamis Khidher Mohammed; Mohammad Khursheed Alam Journal: Biomed Res Int Date: 2021-04-09 Impact factor: 3.411
Authors: Amanda K H Andresen; Malin V Jonsson; Gerhard Sulo; Dorina S Thelen; Xie-Qi Shi Journal: Dentomaxillofac Radiol Date: 2021-07-29 Impact factor: 2.419