The Prevalence of Dental Anomalies in Orthodontic Patients at the State University of New York at Buffalo

Abstract

Objective: To determine the prevalence of permanent tooth anomalies in patients attending the graduate orthodontic clinic at the State University of New York at Buffalo. Materials and methods:Charts of 496 subjects (310 females and 186 males) met the inclusion criteria for this study. The mean ages were 16 years and 3 months for the combined gender sample that received orthodontic treatment in the graduate orthodontic clinic between 2007 and 2010. Full pretreatment records (intraoral photographs, digital study models, lateral cephalograms and panoramic radiographs) were used for the assessment. Charts were examined for these anomalies: agenesis, supernumerary, impaction and delayed tooth eruption. Subjects were categorized by gender and ethnicity. The percentages of the anomalies were assessed according to type of malocclusion, gender, race, location, tooth class and region in the dental arches.Results: Sixty-four subjects (12.9%) had at least one occurrence of delayed eruption and impaction (DEI), followed by 47 subjects (9.5%) who had at least one occurrence of agenesis, and seven (1.4%) had a supernumerary condition. Approximately 80% of the subjects had no dental anomalies. The presence of more than one anomaly was observed in 61 subjects. Twelve subjects (2.4%) had both agenesis and DEI. Agenesis tended to be more common in class II malocclusions (p = 0.012). Conclusion:The prevalence of permanent tooth anomalies was (20.4%). The percentage occurrence of DEI was the highest (12.9%) followed by dental agenesis (9.5%) and supernumerary teeth (1.4%) in the orthodontic patients at the State University of New York at Buffalo.

Association between dental anomalies and malocclusion in Brazilian orthodontic patients

“…Microdontia: teeth physically smaller than usual with reduction of the mesiodistal and/ or gingivoincisal crown dimension. When there was involvement of the upper lateral incisor, it was considered small when the incisal mesiodistal width of the tooth crown was lower than its contralateral homologous or its lower counterpart (peg-shaped lateral) (15). The same criterion was used for the other teeth; 4.…”

Dental Anomalies among Patients with Malocclusion- A Cross Sectional Study

“…Thongudomporn U and Freer TJ(1998) in their study which was carried out in a dental school, The University of Queensland stated that 74.8% of 111 orthodontic patients had atleast one dental anomaly and Dens Invaginatus was the most common dental anomaly [6]. There are various other studies that state the association between dental anomalies and malocclusion like Suwadee Kositbowornchai et al(2010) in his study done on Thai patients reported that nearly 38.6% of the subjects had atleast one dental anomaly [8] followed by Athari Al-Amiri et al(2013) in his study which was carried out in New York at Buffalo reported that nearly 20.4% of the subjects had atleast one dental anomaly with delayed eruption and impaction as the most common dental anomaly followed by agenesis and supernumerary tooth [7].…”

Radiographic Investigation of The Relationship Between Dental Malocclusions And Dental Anomalies on the Turkish Population

“…5,6 Dental anomalies may also impair orthodontic treatment and other dental treatments; therefore, the presence should be investigated before treatment and should be considered during treatment planning. 3,6,7 In literature, the prevalence of dental anomalies has been investigated in many studies, but very few of these studies have examined the relationship between dental anomalies and malocclusions. 1,8 Therefore, in this study, it was aimed to investigate the relationship between various anomalies (supernumerary, agenesis, transposition, microdontia, dilaceration, taurodontism) and dental malocclusions.…”