| Literature DB >> 35535016 |
Hao Zhang1, Jingbo Ma2, Zhicheng Zhang3, Yafei Feng4, Chuan Cai5, Chao Wang6.
Abstract
Objective: This cross-sectional study aimed to investigate the characteristics of malocclusions in scoliotic patients through clinical examinations.Entities:
Keywords: Dentofacial anomalies; Facial asymmetry; Malocclusion; Scoliosis
Year: 2022 PMID: 35535016 PMCID: PMC9117788 DOI: 10.4041/kjod21.259
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Korean J Orthod Impact factor: 1.361
Sex distribution, age, severity distribution, and treatment method distribution in patients with scoliosis
| Variable | IS group (n = 58) | CS group (n = 48) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sex distribution | 0.001 | ||
| Male | 7 (12.1) | 19 (39.6) | |
| Female | 51 (87.9) | 29 (60.4) | |
| Age | - | ||
| Mean | 14Y8M | 15Y3M | |
| Min–max | 12Y4M–20Y2M | 10Y5M–23Y6M | |
| Severity distribution | 0.020 | ||
| Cobb angle ≥ 45° | 22 (37.9) | 31 (64.6) | |
| Cobb angle < 45° | 36 (62.1) | 17 (35.4) | |
| Treatment method distribution | < 0.001 | ||
| Surgical treatment | 20 (34.5) | 42 (87.5) | |
| Physical therapy | 38 (65.5) | 6 (12.5) |
Values are presented as number (%).
Chi-squared test was performed to compare IS and CS groups.
IS group, idiopathic scoliosis group; CS group, congenital scoliosis group; Y, year; M, month.
*p < 0.05; **p < 0.01.
Distribution of angle classification in the idiopathic scoliosis, congenital scoliosis, and control groups
| Angle classification | IS group | CS group | Control group | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| n | % | n | % | n | % | ||||||
| Normocclusion and Class I | 34 | 58.6 | 22 | 45.8 | 103 | 67.8 | 0.311 | 0.006 | 0.136 | ||
| Class II | 13 | 22.4 | 10 | 20.8 | 24 | 15.8 | 0.260 | 0.417 | 1.000 | ||
| Class II subgroup | 10 | 17.2 | 14 | 29.2 | 11 | 7.2 | 0.031 | < 0.001 | 0.144 | ||
| Class III | 1 | 1.7 | 2 | 4.2 | 14 | 9.2 | 0.060 | 0.261 | 0.450 | ||
Chi-squared test was performed to compare IS and control groups, CS and control groups, IS and CS groups.
IS group, idiopathic scoliosis group; CS group, congenital scoliosis group.
*p < 0.05; **p < 0.01.
Figure 1X-ray and dental images of an 18-year-old female patient with congenital scoliosis and an Angle Class II subgroup classification. A, Full-length anteroposterior spine X-ray image showing a severely deformed and twisted spine. B, Dental image showing normal mandibular occlusion on the right side. C, Dental image showing an oblique occlusal plane. D, Dental image showing mandibular deviation on the left side.
Occlusal patterns in the idiopathic scoliosis, congenital scoliosis, and control groups
| Occlusal pattern | IS group | CS group | Control group | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| n | % | n | % | n | % | ||||||
| Asymmetric molar relationship | 10 | 17.2 | 14 | 29.2 | 12 | 7.9 | 0.048 | < 0.001 | 0.144 | ||
| Asymmetric canine relationship | 11 | 19.6 | 14 | 29.8 | 14 | 9.5 | 0.094 | 0.001 | 0.232 | ||
| Deviation of the upper middle line | 15 | 25.9 | 15 | 31.3 | 26 | 17.1 | 0.152 | 0.034 | 0.540 | ||
| Deviation of the lower middle line | 23 | 39.7 | 22 | 45.8 | 39 | 25.7 | 0.047 | 0.008 | 0.522 | ||
| Anterior deep overbite | 21 | 36.2 | 19 | 39.6 | 36 | 23.7 | 0.068 | 0.003 | 0.721 | ||
| Unilateral posterior crossbite | 11 | 19.0 | 13 | 27.1 | 13 | 8.6 | 0.034 | 0.001 | 0.320 | ||
| Canted occlusal plane | 12 | 20.7 | 13 | 27.1 | 15 | 9.9 | 0.036 | 0.003 | 0.440 | ||
Chi-squared test was performed to compare IS and control groups, CS and control groups, IS and CS groups.
IS group, idiopathic scoliosis group; CS group, congenital scoliosis group.
*p < 0.05; **p < 0.01.