Impacted Maxillary Canine Prevalence and Its Association with Other Dental Anomalies in a Mexican Population

Herrera-Atoche, José Rubén; Agüayo-de-Pau, María del Rosario; Escoffié-Ramírez, Mauricio; Aguilar-Ayala, Fernando Javier; Carrillo-Ávila, Bertha Arelly; Rejón-Peraza, Marina Eduviges

doi:10.1155/2017/7326061

Cited by 23 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…El-Khateeb et al ( 18 ) and Afify and Zawawi ( 17 ) found 1.6, 1.44 and 3.3% prevalence of impacted maxillary canines in Al-Madinah, Abha and Jeddah, respectively. Bilateral impaction was present in 22.3%, this is similar to the 25% and 19.2% observed in the Mexican ( 19 ) and Greek ( 1 ) population, respectively. The maxillary canines were ten time more prevalent than mandibular canine impactions.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 77%

Incidence, severity and orthodontic treatment difficulty index of impacted canines in Saudi population

Alhammadi¹,

Asiri²,

Almashraqi³

2018

J Clin Exp Dent

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundThe objective of this study was to assess the incidence, severity and orthodontic treatment difficulty of impacted maxillary canines in Saudi population.Material and MethodsThis retrospective study included an investigation of panoramic radiographs for patients attended College of Dentistry, Jazan University, Saudi Arabia. The incidence of canine impaction and orthodontic treatment difficulty index of maxillary canine impaction was assessed based on; (1) patient age, (2) vertical position, (3) buccolingual position, (4) horizontal position, (5) incisors alignment, (6) canine space, (7) midline coincidence, (8) rotation of impacted tooth. Statistical analyses were calculated by independent Chi-Square test. A P value of less than 0.05 was considered significant.ResultsCanine impaction was found in (1.9%) of the population. Bilateral canine impaction was present in 22.3% of the patient with impacted canines. Ninety two percent had impacted maxillary canines only while 7.5% had impacted maxillary canines with other impacted teeth. The ratio of maxillary to mandibular impaction was about 10:1. Females (69.4%) had more impacted canines than males (30.6%) with no significant sex predilection. Orthodontic treatment difficulty index was statistically significant (P ≤0.05) in males more than females. Males revealed statistically significant (P ≤0.05) difficulty regarding canine angulation and the vertical position while females showed significant difficulty regarding dental midline and incisors irregularity or crowding of incisor segment.ConclusionsPrevalence of maxillary canine impaction in Jazan is within the range of impacted canine in other populations. Females showed more canine impactions than males while the orthodontic treatment difficulty index is more in males than females. Key words:Incidence, Jazan, impaction, maxillary canines, difficulty index.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 77%

Incidence, severity and orthodontic treatment difficulty index of impacted canines in Saudi population

Alhammadi¹,

Asiri²,

Almashraqi³

2018

J Clin Exp Dent

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Supernumerary cusps can occur on any tooth with cusps. They are frequently seen in patients with other dental anomalies (Herrera‐Atoche et al, ). Prevalence varies by geographical region (Yamunadevi et al, ).…”

Section: Definitionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Elements of morphology: Standard terminology for the teeth and classifying genetic dental disorders

Dure-Molla

Fournier

Manzanares

et al. 2019

American J of Med Genetics Pt A

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Dental anomalies occur frequently in a number of genetic disorders and act as major signs in diagnosing these disorders. We present definitions of the most common dental signs and propose a classification usable as a diagnostic tool by dentists, clinical geneticists, and other health care providers. The definitions are part of the series Elements of Morphology and have been established after careful discussions within an international group of experienced dentists and geneticists. The classification system was elaborated in the French collaborative network "TÊTECOU" and the affiliated

show abstract

“…Studies found the impacted maxillary canine prevalence to be 0.9%-6% (18,19). The ratio of palatal impaction to labial impaction can be as high as 9:1 (20).…”

Section: Evaluation Of Impacted Teeth and Oral Anomaliesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cone Beam Computed Tomography in Orthodontics

Coşkun¹,

Kaya

2018

Turk J Orthod

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Orthodontists treat malocclusions by applying three-dimensional forces. For years, the diagnosis of this three-dimensional condition and the related treatment plan has been based on two-dimensional imaging. Lateral and anteroposterior cephalometric, panoramic, and periapical radiographs are some of the two-dimensional radiographs routinely used in orthodontics. Despite being highly beneficial in evaluating skeletal and dental relations, these radiographs fail to provide sufficient two-dimensional information in certain cases. The purpose of this compilation is to review the use of cone-beam computed tomography in orthodontics.Keywords: Cone-beam computed tomography, lateral cephalometry, anteroposterior cephalometry CONVENTIONAL COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHYComputed tomography (CT) was developed by Sir Godfrey Hounsfield in 1967. Six generations of these systems have been developed since 1967. The system classification is based on the pieces of the devices and the physical movements of the X-ray. There was a single radiation source and a detector in the first-generation tomographies. An image was taken in sections. In the second-generation tomographies, there were a number of detectors. However, these detectors were unable to display the entire object. In the third generation, on the other hand, great improvements were provided in the detectors and data gathering technology. The large detectors reduced the requirement of a radiation source to move around the object and were called "fan beam CT. " However, ring shaped artefacts and distortions usually occur on the generated images. Fourth-generation tomographies were developed to address this issue. A moving radiation source and a fixed detector were created. This indicated considering modifications in the angle of the radiation source; hence, there was a more reflected radiation. Finally, fifth and sixth generation tomographies were developed to diminish the movement and reflection artefacts. In both the generations, the detector is fixed and the electron ray scans the semicircular tungsten strip anode. Radiation is generated at the point where the electron ray hits the anode and is transmitted to the object through a rotating X-ray source (1).Conventional computed tomographies have certain restrictions. Owing to very large size, tomography machines require huge physical spaces where they are located. They are much more expensive than conventional radiography machines. Images are made of a number of sections, and it consumes immense time and money to obtain a final image. The main reason restricting the use of CT in orthodontics is however the high dose of radiation (1). CONE-BEAM CT CBCT TechniqueCone-beam CT (CBCT) was introduced in the market with an aim to bring a solution to the disadvantages of con-

show abstract

Impacted Maxillary Canine Prevalence and Its Association with Other Dental Anomalies in a Mexican Population

Cited by 23 publications

References 28 publications

Incidence, severity and orthodontic treatment difficulty index of impacted canines in Saudi population

Incidence, severity and orthodontic treatment difficulty index of impacted canines in Saudi population

Elements of morphology: Standard terminology for the teeth and classifying genetic dental disorders

Cone Beam Computed Tomography in Orthodontics

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About