Contemporary Approach to Diagnosis And Treatment of Impacted Teeth

Gasymova, Z V

doi:10.15690/vramn.v69i3-4.989

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…According to our findings 2.7% of the patients they had impaction teeth and transposition too. Gasymova 15 in 2014 found out prevalence of 12.53% of impacted teeth among the orthodontic treated patients. The treatment in these cases was done using low-frequency ultrasonic for their eruption stimulation.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Impaction of Teeth - Frequency and Most Often Used Treatment Protocols

Jordanova-Kostova¹,

Stanimirov²

2017

EDUJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cite this article:Jordanova-Kostova GR, Stanimirov PK. Impaction of teeth -frequency and most often used treatment protocols. Stoma Edu J. 2017;4(4):264-269Introduction: Tooth impaction is a biological phenomenon that can affect every tooth group, but most often third molars, canines and second premolars. Methodology: The aim of our survey is to find out the prevalence of impacted teeth in different tooth groups. Another aim is to prove the following hypothesis, namely that there is a relationship between impaction teeth and treatment protocols using the method of distalization of the upper molars with the Pendulum appliance and also releasing space in the arc by the extraction of permanent teeth. The study analyzed 182 patients diagnosed with impacted teeth and excluded patients with impacted third molars. The analysis used the statistics packet SPSS version 13.0. Results: The most common impacted teeth are the upper canines -137 teeth, followed by upper second premolars -50 teeth, the lower second premolars -27 teeth, the lower canine -20 teeth, the lower second molar -11 teeth, the upper central incisor -8 teeth, the lower lateral incisor -3. Significant statistical relations were found between tooth agenesis, odonthoma collections and tooth transposition with impaction. Patients in the early growth period stand a better chance not to undergo non-extraction treatment than those for whom the formation of the constant dentition has been finalized and who have passed the peak of their puberty growth. Conclusion: The early diagnosis of the problem is an important factor for a successful treatment. The growth potential of the patient is the leading factor that supports the processes.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Impaction of Teeth - Frequency and Most Often Used Treatment Protocols

Jordanova-Kostova¹,

Stanimirov²

2017

EDUJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Study of the prevalence of anomalies of eruption of different groups of teeth in patients who have sought orthodontic care

Ishchenko¹,

Popov

2021

Aspirantskiy Vestnik Povolzhiya

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND: Tooth impaction leads to many aesthetic and functional disorders and to the general deterioration in the quality of human life. Domestic and foreign scientists point at the increase in the number of medical consultations on this problem. Although the incidence of orthodontic care among patients with tooth impaction is extremely high, there is no consensus on the prevalence of impacted teeth. AIM: To analyze the prevalence of dentition abnormality in various groups of patients who sought orthodontic care. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study was conducted at the clinical setting of the Department of Pediatric Dentistry and Orthodontics and the Department of Dentistry of IPE of Samara State Medical University in 2017-2020. A retrospective analysis of 423 medical records of orthodontic patients aged 18-32 years and a clinical examination of 134 dental patients aged 18-36 years were performed. A total of 557 patients were examined, including 236 women and 321 men. RESULTS: A retrospective analysis of 423 case histories revealed impaction of 104 teeth of 72 patients (17.02%). A clinical examination of 134 orthodontic patients aged 18-36 years was conducted, 15 patients (11.19%) showed impaction of 23 teeth. CONCLUSIONS: In the retrospective analysis of the upper jaw, molars were the predominant impacted teeth of 20 patients (62.5%), and canines were the second most frequently impacted teeth of 7 patients (21.88%). In the lower jaw, molars were also the most frequently impacted teeth in 59 patients (81.94%), and premolars occupied the second place among the most frequently impacted teeth in 8 patients (11.12%). Clinical examination of 134 orthodontic patients aged 18-36 years showed that 15 patients (11.19%) had impaction of 23 teeth. The majority of the impacted teeth were molars of the upper jaw (56,52%), and of the lower jaw (85,71). The second most frequently impacted teeth were maxillary canine teeth (26,09%) and mandibular canine teeth (14,29%).

show abstract

Contemporary Approach to Diagnosis And Treatment of Impacted Teeth

Cited by 2 publications

References 0 publications

Impaction of Teeth - Frequency and Most Often Used Treatment Protocols

Impaction of Teeth - Frequency and Most Often Used Treatment Protocols

Study of the prevalence of anomalies of eruption of different groups of teeth in patients who have sought orthodontic care

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About