| Literature DB >> 34188406 |
K Moinuddin Hasan1, C R Sobhana1, Saurabh Kumar Rawat2, Deepika Singh3, Prakhar Mongia1, Ansari Fakhruddin1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The etiology of mandibular third molar impaction is proposed to be mainly due to inadequate space between the distal of the second mandibular molar and the anterior border of the ramus of the mandible. This study was aimed to assess whether an association exists between different facial types and mandibular length to impaction of mandibular third molars.Entities:
Keywords: Euryprosopic; facial type; impaction; leptoprosopic; mandibular third molar; mesoprosopic
Year: 2021 PMID: 34188406 PMCID: PMC8191555 DOI: 10.4103/njms.NJMS_111_20
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Natl J Maxillofac Surg ISSN: 0975-5950
Figure 1Facial height in female's frontal view. Facial height measured from soft-tissue nasion (Point in midline of nasal root at frontonasal suture, the most concave aspect of bridge of nose in center line) to soft-tissue menton (most inferior point on chin) – (a) leptoprosopic, (b) mesoprosopic, and (c) brachyprosopic
Figure 2Facial width in female's frontal view – zygion right (most lateral point of each zygomatic arch) to zygion left – (a) leptoprosopic, (b) mesoprosopic, and (c) brachyprosopic
Figure 3Cephalometric tracing and landmarks. Mandibular length measured on the lateral cephalogram as a distance between gonion to gnathion. (Go: Gonion – the constructed point of intersection of the ramus plane and the mandibular plane, Gn: Gnathion – Most anteroinferior point on the symphysis of the chin)
Distribution according to gender (n=170)
| Sex | Count (%) |
|---|---|
| Male | 67 (39.4) |
| Female | 103 (60.6) |
Distribution according to age
| Age | Count (%) |
|---|---|
| 18–20 | 85 (50.0) |
| 21–23 | 58 (34.1) |
| >23 | 27 (15.9) |
| Mean±SD | 21.2±3.2 |
SD: Standard deviation
Association between facial index and impaction based on gender
| Gender | Facial index | Impaction, count (%) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yes | No | ||||
| Male | Hypereuryprosopic | 2 (20.0) | 8 (80.0) | 8.02* | 0.046 |
| Euryprosopic | 21 (52.5) | 19 (47.5) | |||
| Mesoprosopic | 18 (50.0) | 18 (50.0) | |||
| Lepto/Hyperleptoprosopic | 32 (66.7) | 16 (33.3) | |||
| Female | Hypereuryprosopic | 25 (46.3) | 29 (53.7) | 1.09 | 0.780 |
| Euryprosopic | 39 (52.7) | 35 (47.3) | |||
| Mesoprosopic | 27 (56.3) | 21 (43.8) | |||
| Lepto/Hyperleptoprosopic | 15 (50.0) | 15 (50.0) | |||
| Total | Hypereuryprosopic | 27 (42.2) | 37 (57.8) | 4.65 | 0.199 |
| Euryprosopic | 60 (52.6) | 54 (47.4) | |||
| Mesoprosopic | 45 (53.6) | 39 (46.4) | |||
| Lepto/Hyperleptoprosopic | 47 (60.3) | 31 (39.7) | |||
*Statistical significant association. χ2: Chi-square test, P: Probability of value
Association between mandibular length and impaction based on gender
| Gender | Mandibular length | Impaction, count (%) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yes | No | ||||
| Male | Short mandibular length | 24 (63.2) | 14 (36.8) | 16.02* | 0.000 |
| Normal | 49 (58.3) | 35 (41.7) | |||
| Long mandibular length | 0 (0.0) | 12 (100.0) | |||
| Female | Short mandibular length | 46 (67.6) | 22 (32.4) | 21.39* | 0.000 |
| Normal | 58 (70.7) | 24 (29.3) | |||
| Long mandibular length | 19 (33.9) | 37 (66.1) | |||
| Total | Short mandibular length | 70 (66.0) | 36 (34.0) | 30.79* | 0.000 |
| Normal | 107 (64.5) | 59 (35.5) | |||
| Long mandibular length | 19 (27.9) | 49 (72.1) | |||
*Statistical significant association. χ2: Chi-square test, P: Probability of value