Association between mandibular posterior alveolar morphology and growth pattern in a Chinese population with normal occlusion

Abstract

Abstract:Objective: To investigate the relationship between growth patterns and mandibular posterior tooth-alveolar bone complex morphology in a Chinese population with normal occlusion. Methods: Forty-five patients with normal occlusion (23 males, 22 females) were included in this study. Among these patients, 20 displayed the vertical growth pattern, and 20 had the horizontal growth pattern, while the remaining patients displayed the average growth pattern. All of the patients underwent dental cone beam computed tomography (CBCT), which included the region of the mandibular posterior teeth and the alveolar. A linear regression analysis and a correlation analysis between the facial height index (FHI) and the alveolar bone morphology were performed. Results: The inclination of the molars, the thickness of the cortical bone, and the height of the mandibular bone differed significantly between patients with the horizontal growth pattern and those with the vertical growth pattern (P<0.05). Significant positive correlations were found between: the FHI and the inclination of the molars; the FHI and the thickness of the cortical bone; and the FHI and the height of the mandibular bone. Conclusions: The mandibular posterior tooth-alveolar bone complex morphology may be affected by growth patterns.

Evaluation of the Relationship Between Morphology, Volume, and Density of the Mandible and Dentofacial Vertical Dimension Using Cone Beam Computed Tomography

“…In the current study, there were no significant differences in the mandibular width of any of the measured sections among the subjects with different facial heights (except for the inter-canine width of the mandible in the apical section). These findings are similar to those of a previous study in which the difference between the widths of the mandibular bone of patients with different facial heights was not significant [5].…”

“…The morphology of the mandible may change as a result of the various loads exerted on it by forces from the attached muscles [1][2][3][4]. Several studies have proposed that mandibular morphology might be related to facial height, as the strength of forces loaded onto the mandible via attached muscles differs between patients with low, moderate or high facial height [5][6][7][8][9]. Assessment of mandibular morphology and condylar shape in orthodontic patients can be an efficient way to determine an appropriate treatment plan and predict the final result of therapy.…”

“…Recently, cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) has become popular in orthodontics as it provides a three-dimensional image of the craniofacial complex and its multidimensional reconstruction of the tooth-bone complex provides a comprehensive view on which the reliable measurements can be made [5,11]. Although CBCT has been used in several studies to evaluate mandibular morphology in recent years [5][6][7][12][13][14], the relationship between mandibular and condylar morphology with different facial types has not yet been clarified.…”

Assessment of the mandibular buccal shelf for orthodontic anchorage: Influence of side, gender and skeletal patterns

“…Unlike numerous studies 13,[32][33][34] In the present study, higher bone height was found in Class III subjects compared with Class I subjects in the region mesial to the second molar, and hyperdivergent males had greater bone height than hypodivergent males in the same region. With regard to the vertical skeletal pattern, some studies 35,36 detected lower bone height in hyperdivergent subjects while in others 11,37,38 Furthermore, the present data can be used as reference for planning orthodontic anchorage on the mandibular buccal shelf. As observed, hypodivergent and Class III subjects showed greater bone thickness of the mandibular buccal shelf; therefore, they tend to be favoured regarding the primary stability of extra-alveolar miniscrews.…”

“…In the present study, higher bone height was found in Class III subjects compared with Class I subjects in the region mesial to the second molar, and hyperdivergent males had greater bone height than hypodivergent males in the same region. With regard to the vertical skeletal pattern, some studies 35,36 detected lower bone height in hyperdivergent subjects while in others 11,37,38 no significant differences were found between the different skeletal patterns. Anyway, these differences are not clinically relevant since the bone height of the buccal shelf was greater than 12 mm in all regions evaluated, and was thus sufficient for the insertion of commercial screws.…”