BackgroundThe aim of this study is to evaluate determinants of maxillary canine impaction taking into account both canine position related variables and the pattern of facial growth.Material and MethodsA retrospective clinical and radiographic analysis was carried out on 109 patients aged between 9 and 10 years at the time of first evaluation. At baseline, SN-GoMe angle, the interincisal angle, the canine angle α and the canine distance d were used to characterize canine location and vertical facial growth. At the end of a two years follow up period the eruption state of each canine of each patient was recorded and accordingly classified as erupted or impacted on a clinical and radiographic basis. Univariate and multivariate statistical analyses were performed, including correlation among the studied variables and principal components analysis; several machine learning methods were also used in order to built a predictive model.ResultsAt the end of the two years follow up period after the first examination, 54 (24.77%) canines were classified as impacted. Except for Angle α values, there were no statistically significant differences between impacted and erupted canines. The studied variables were not significantly correlated, except for the SN-GoMe Angle and the distance d in the impacted canine group and the angle α and the distance d in erupted canines group. All variables, except for SN-GoMe Angle in erupted canines, have a partial communality with the first two principal components greater than 50%. Among the learning machine methods tested to classify data, the best performance was obtained by the random forest method, with an overall accuracy in predicting canine eruption of 88.3%.ConclusionsThe studied determinants are easy to perform measurements on 2D routinely executed radiographic images; they seems independently related to canine impaction and have reliable accuracy in predicting maxillary canine eruption. Key words:Canine impaction, Determinants, Facial growth.

BackgroundTo evaluate if changes in lower incisor position following orthodontic treatment are correlated with development of gingival recessions.Material and MethodsPre- and post-treatment digital models and lateral cephalograms of 22 subjects were collected retrospectively. The clinical crown length, gingival scallop, and papilla height of the central lower incisor were measured along with the cephalometric incisor’s inclination, the distance from the mandibular plane, and the distance between the Infradentale and Menton points. Statistical correlations between gingival and cephalometric variables were studied. In addition, two groups were defined based on the post-treatment incisor inclination value (‘normal’ or ‘proclined’) and compared.ResultsThe incisor inclination was correlated with the change in gingival scallop and papilla height. Moreover, there was a statistically significant difference in clinical crown height and gingival scallop between the ‘normal’ group and the ‘proclined’ group.ConclusionsChanges in lower incisor position, especially an excessive proclination, after orthodontic treatment may play a role in the development of gingival recession. Key words:Orthodontic treatment, Incisor inclination, IMPA, Gingival recession, Alveolar bone.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the differences in sella dimensions and shape between growing patients with Class I, Class II, and Class III skeletal malocclusions, evaluated through morphometric analysis. Seventy-eight subjects aged between 9 and 13 years were selected and assigned to either the Class I, Class II, or Class III groups according to the measured ANB angle (the angle between the Nasion, skeletal A-point and skeletal B-point). Six landmarks were digitised to outline the shape of the sella turcica. Linear measurements of the sella length and depth were also performed. Procrustes superimposition, principal component analysis, and canonical variate analysis were used to evaluate the differences in sella shape between the three groups. A one-way MANOVA and Tukey’s or Games-Howell tests were used to evaluate the presence of differences in sella dimensions between the three groups, gender, and age. The canonical variate analysis revealed a statistically significant difference in sella shape between the Class I and the Class II groups, mostly explained by the CV1 axis and related to the posterior clinoidal process and the floor of the sella. No differences were found regarding linear measurements, except between subjects with different age. These differences in sella shape, that are present in the earlier developmental stages, could be used as a predictor of facial growth, but further studies are needed.

Introduction Implant stability is influenced by bone density, implant design, and site preparation characteristics. Piezoelectric implant site preparation (PISP) has been demonstrated to improve secondary stability compared with conventional drilling techniques. Osseodensification drills (OD) have been recently introduced to enhance both bone density and implant secondary stability. The objective of the present multi‐center prospective randomized controlled trial was to monitor implant stability changes over the first 90 days of healing after implant bed preparation with OD or PISP. Methods Each patient received two identical, adjacent or contralateral implants in the posterior maxilla. Following randomization, test sites were prepared with OD and control sites with PISP. Resonance frequency analysis was performed immediately after implant placement and after 7, 14, 21, 28, 60, and 90 days. Implants were then restored with single screw‐retained metal‐ceramic crowns and followed for 12 months after loading. Results Twenty‐seven patients (15 males and 12 females; mean age 63.0 ± 11.8 years) were included in final analysis. Each patient received two identical implants in the posterior maxilla (total = 54 implants). After 1 year of loading, 53 implants were satisfactorily in function (one failure in test group 28 days after placement). Mean peak insertion torque (40.7 ± 12.3 Ncm and 39.5 ± 10.2 Ncm in test and control group, respectively) and mean implant stability quotient (ISQ) value at baseline (71.3 ± 6.9 and 69.3 ± 7.6 in test and control group, respectively) showed no significant differences between the two groups. After an initial slight stability decrease, a shift to increasing ISQ values occurred after 14 days in control group and after 21 days in test group, but with no significant differences in ISQ values between the two groups during the first 90 days of healing. Conclusion No significant differences in either primary or secondary stability or implant survival rate after 1 year of loading were demonstrated between implants inserted into sites prepared with OD and PISP.

No abstract