Literature DB >> 35130336

Proximity of upper central incisors to incisive canal among subjects with maxillary dentoalveolar protrusion in various facial growth patterns.

Remsh Khaled Al-Rokhami, Karim Ahmed Sakran, Maged Sultan Alhammadi, Mubarak Ahmed Mashrah, Baocheng Cao, Majedh Abdo Ali Alsomairi, Naseem Ali Al-Worafi.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the position of the upper central incisor roots (U1) relative to the incisive canal (IC) among subjects with maxillary dentoalveolar protrusion in various facial growth patterns.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: 240 cone beam computed tomography images of skeletal Class I and II maxillary or bimaxillary protrusive subjects with a mean age of 23.74 ± 3.73 years were enrolled according to their facial growth pattern. The IC volume was measured using Mimics 21 software (Materialise, Leuven, Belgium). The U1 inter-root distance, width of IC, and their proximity were estimated using Invivo6 software (Anatomage, San Jose, CA).
RESULTS: The IC volume was slightly greater among the high angle facial group and female patients than the other groups. Overall, the IC width was greater than the U1 inter-root distance in 55.65%, 57.6%, and 65% among the average, low, and high angle facial groups, respectively, and in 56.5% and 62.9% of males and females, respectively. The overall anteroposterior (sagittal) distances between the U1 roots and IC were 4.36 ± 1.18, 4.78 ± 1.17, and 3.83 ± 0.90 mm among the average, low, and high angle facial groups, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: The high angle facial group and female patients showed slightly greater IC dimensions than the other groups. The overall maximum sagittal distances between the U1 and IC were around 5.5, 6, and 4.7 mm among the average, low, and high angle facial groups, respectively. The low angle facial group and male patients tended to have greater sagittal distances. Therefore, the present findings could serve as a guideline when a considerable amount of upper incisor retraction is planned for Class I or II maxillary or bimaxillary dentoalveolar protrusion patients.
© 2022 by The EH Angle Education and Research Foundation, Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cone beam computed tomography; Incisive canal; Retraction; Tooth movement; Upper central incisors

Mesh:

Year:  2022        PMID: 35130336      PMCID: PMC9235379          DOI: 10.2319/080721-620.1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Angle Orthod        ISSN: 0003-3219            Impact factor:   2.684


  18 in total

1.  Approximation and contact of the maxillary central incisor roots with the incisive canal after maximum retraction with temporary anchorage devices: Report of 2 patients.

Authors:  Chooryung J Chung; Yoon Jeong Choi; Kyung-Ho Kim
Journal:  Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop       Date:  2015-09       Impact factor: 2.650

2.  The limitations of tooth movement within the symphysis, studied with laminagraphy and standardized occlusal films.

Authors:  R M Mulie; A T Hoeve
Journal:  J Clin Orthod       Date:  1976-12

3.  Apical root resorption after orthodontic treatment -- a retrospective study.

Authors:  Satu Apajalahti; Jaakko Sakari Peltola
Journal:  Eur J Orthod       Date:  2007-07-13       Impact factor: 3.075

4.  Soft tissue limitations in orthodontics: treatment planning guidelines.

Authors:  J L Ackerman; W R Proffit
Journal:  Angle Orthod       Date:  1997       Impact factor: 2.079

5.  Contact of the incisive canal and upper central incisors causing root resorption after retraction with orthodontic mini-implants: A CBCT study.

Authors:  Yichen Pan; Si Chen
Journal:  Angle Orthod       Date:  2018-11-28       Impact factor: 2.079

6.  Cone-beam computed tomography evaluation of the association of cortical plate proximity and apical root resorption after orthodontic treatment.

Authors:  Tomoo Nakada; Mitsuru Motoyoshi; Eri Horinuki; Noriyoshi Shimizu
Journal:  J Oral Sci       Date:  2016       Impact factor: 1.556

7.  Facial pattern differences in long-faced children and adults.

Authors:  H W Fields; W R Proffit; W L Nixon; C Phillips; E Stanek
Journal:  Am J Orthod       Date:  1984-03

8.  Correlation between cortical plate proximity and apical root resorption.

Authors:  A Horiuchi; H Hotokezaka; K Kobayashi
Journal:  Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop       Date:  1998-09       Impact factor: 2.650

9.  Cone beam computed tomography assessment of the maxillary incisive canal and foramen: considerations of anatomical variations when placing immediate implants.

Authors:  Samah M Al-Amery; Phrabhakaran Nambiar; Marhazlinda Jamaludin; Jacob John; Wei Cheong Ngeow
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-02-13       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Craniofacial height in relation to cross-sectional maxillary and mandibular morphology.

Authors:  Anna Klinge; Karin Becktor; Christina Lindh; Jonas P Becktor
Journal:  Prog Orthod       Date:  2017-10-23       Impact factor: 2.750

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.