2011
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-263x.2011.01121.x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Maxillary labial frenum attachment in children

Abstract: The results of this study suggest that, in children, ethnic background and gender are not associated with maxillary labial frenum attachment type, whereas age is strongly associated.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2

Citation Types

8
36
0
5

Year Published

2016
2016
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8
2

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 50 publications
(49 citation statements)
references
References 7 publications
8
36
0
5
Order By: Relevance
“…The present study investigated the prevalence of different types of maxillary labial frenum attachment in 200 children of different ethnic backgrounds, aged 2-15 years old, in Malaysia. From this study, it was found that the most prevalent type of attachment was the mucosal type of attachment and this result is in accordance to the previous studies [15]. In contrast to previous studies done on Nepalese [16] and Brazilian [17] children, the most common type of frenal attachment was the gingival type and the least common was papillary penetrating type.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 91%
“…The present study investigated the prevalence of different types of maxillary labial frenum attachment in 200 children of different ethnic backgrounds, aged 2-15 years old, in Malaysia. From this study, it was found that the most prevalent type of attachment was the mucosal type of attachment and this result is in accordance to the previous studies [15]. In contrast to previous studies done on Nepalese [16] and Brazilian [17] children, the most common type of frenal attachment was the gingival type and the least common was papillary penetrating type.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 91%
“…5,7 The significance of the higher proportion of type 2 in self-reported Asian and Hispanic patients in our cohort is unclear, however may reflect the small cohort size.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 83%
“…[ 13 ] The mucosal and gingival types of frenal attachment are more common in permanent dentition. [ 13 22 30 ] Midline diastema is the most common esthetic problem, and its prevalence ranges from 1.6% to 25.4%. [ 22 ] The aim of the study is to assess the most prevalent type of maxillary labial frenum based on its attachment site and morphology in Class I, Class II, Class III skeletal participants and its association with midline diastema.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%