The effects of dehiscence and fenestration before orthodontic treatment on external apical root resorption in maxillary incisors

Cha, Chang; Huang, Desheng; Kang, Qichao; Yin, Manman; Yan, Xiulin

doi:10.1016/j.ajodo.2020.06.043

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 49 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Moreover, the reduced volume of the alveolar bone might change the center of tooth resistance during tooth movement, which result in further loss of alveolar bone. The amount of external apical root resorption at maxillary incisors and dehiscence prevalence before orthodontic treatment is relevant (3). Previous studies showed that clinicians should be aware of the probability of thin cortical bone plates in patients suffering from insufficient alveolar bone (4).…”

Section: Original Articlementioning

confidence: 99%

Alveolar bone defects around mandibular anterior teeth in Class I, II, and III malocclusions: a retrospective CBCT evaluation

Wang¹,

Ma²,

Chen³

2023

Front Oral Maxillofac Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The aim of this study was to quantitatively and qualitatively evaluate alveolar defects of mandibular anterior alveolar bone in three different types of malocclusion with cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) by an observational cross-sectional study.Methods: A total of 542 teeth from 30 skeletal Class I malocclusion (ANB =0-4°) (mean age: 19.26±5.63 years), 33 Class II malocclusion (ANB >4°) (mean age: 19.36±4.17 years), and 28 Class III malocclusion (ANB <0°) (mean age: 21.47±4.53 years) patients were evaluated with CBCT. CBCT images and lateral cephalograms were imported into the Dolphin software in DICOM format, and 3D reconstructions were performed. Sagittal sectional views were evaluated with regard to labial and lingual alveolar bone thickness and vertical alveolar bone level. Analysis of variance and Tukey's test were used for statistical comparisons at P<0.05.Results: Class II (64.47%) and Class III malocclusions (58.43%) had higher prevalence of dehiscence than Class I malocclusions (32.96%). No significant difference was found in the prevalence of fenestration among the three groups. In general, Class II and III groups had lesser alveolar bone volume than the Class I group. Furthermore, the vertical alveolar height and coronal alveolar bone thickness in Class II malocclusion was significantly lesser than that in the Class III group. Conclusions:The Class II group, followed by the Class III group, showed the most severe alveolar bone deficiency. For these patients undergoing orthodontic treatment, the comprehensive treatment should be taken to avoid aggravated preexisting alveolar bone loss in the mandibular anterior teeth, and bone augmentation would be recommended when necessary.

show abstract

Section: Original Articlementioning

confidence: 99%