Cargando…
Prevalence of maxillary canine impaction in skeletal Class III malocclusions compared to Class I malocclusions
BACKGROUND: The aim of the present investigation was to evaluate if an orthodontic population of Class III malocclusion patients shows a different prevalence of maxillary canine impaction than Class I subjects. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Fifty-eight subjects were retrospectively selected and assigned to...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Medicina Oral S.L.
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6461734/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31001397 http://dx.doi.org/10.4317/jced.55478 |
_version_ | 1783410533700993024 |
---|---|
author | Di Carlo, Gabriele Saccucci, Matteo Luzzi, Valeria Ierardo, Gaetano Vozza, Iole Sfasciotti, Gian-Luca Polimeni, Antonella |
author_facet | Di Carlo, Gabriele Saccucci, Matteo Luzzi, Valeria Ierardo, Gaetano Vozza, Iole Sfasciotti, Gian-Luca Polimeni, Antonella |
author_sort | Di Carlo, Gabriele |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: The aim of the present investigation was to evaluate if an orthodontic population of Class III malocclusion patients shows a different prevalence of maxillary canine impaction than Class I subjects. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Fifty-eight subjects were retrospectively selected and assigned to the Class I group (n= 32) or the Class III group (n= 26), depending on the ANB and WITS values. Lateral cephalograms were used to collect angular and linear measurements that described the skeletal and dental maxillary features of the subjects, while orthopantomography was used to assess the impaction or the correct eruption of the maxillary canines. An independent samples T-test or a Mann–Whitney U-test was used to compare the cephalometric values between the two groups, while a chi-squared test was used to evaluate the distribution of maxillary canine impaction between the two groups. RESULTS: No statistically significant difference was found for the cephalometric variables, and the frequency of canine impaction showed no difference between the Class III and Class I subjects. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with skeletal Class III malocclusions did not show a different prevalence of canine impaction; therefore, such skeletal features cannot be used as a diagnostic aid for assessment of the risk of maxillary canine impaction. Key words:Skeletal Class III, Angle Class III, maxillary canine impaction, tooth impaction. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6461734 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | Medicina Oral S.L. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-64617342019-04-18 Prevalence of maxillary canine impaction in skeletal Class III malocclusions compared to Class I malocclusions Di Carlo, Gabriele Saccucci, Matteo Luzzi, Valeria Ierardo, Gaetano Vozza, Iole Sfasciotti, Gian-Luca Polimeni, Antonella J Clin Exp Dent Research BACKGROUND: The aim of the present investigation was to evaluate if an orthodontic population of Class III malocclusion patients shows a different prevalence of maxillary canine impaction than Class I subjects. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Fifty-eight subjects were retrospectively selected and assigned to the Class I group (n= 32) or the Class III group (n= 26), depending on the ANB and WITS values. Lateral cephalograms were used to collect angular and linear measurements that described the skeletal and dental maxillary features of the subjects, while orthopantomography was used to assess the impaction or the correct eruption of the maxillary canines. An independent samples T-test or a Mann–Whitney U-test was used to compare the cephalometric values between the two groups, while a chi-squared test was used to evaluate the distribution of maxillary canine impaction between the two groups. RESULTS: No statistically significant difference was found for the cephalometric variables, and the frequency of canine impaction showed no difference between the Class III and Class I subjects. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with skeletal Class III malocclusions did not show a different prevalence of canine impaction; therefore, such skeletal features cannot be used as a diagnostic aid for assessment of the risk of maxillary canine impaction. Key words:Skeletal Class III, Angle Class III, maxillary canine impaction, tooth impaction. Medicina Oral S.L. 2019-03-01 /pmc/articles/PMC6461734/ /pubmed/31001397 http://dx.doi.org/10.4317/jced.55478 Text en Copyright: © 2019 Medicina Oral S.L. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Research Di Carlo, Gabriele Saccucci, Matteo Luzzi, Valeria Ierardo, Gaetano Vozza, Iole Sfasciotti, Gian-Luca Polimeni, Antonella Prevalence of maxillary canine impaction in skeletal Class III malocclusions compared to Class I malocclusions |
title | Prevalence of maxillary canine impaction in skeletal Class III malocclusions compared to Class I malocclusions |
title_full | Prevalence of maxillary canine impaction in skeletal Class III malocclusions compared to Class I malocclusions |
title_fullStr | Prevalence of maxillary canine impaction in skeletal Class III malocclusions compared to Class I malocclusions |
title_full_unstemmed | Prevalence of maxillary canine impaction in skeletal Class III malocclusions compared to Class I malocclusions |
title_short | Prevalence of maxillary canine impaction in skeletal Class III malocclusions compared to Class I malocclusions |
title_sort | prevalence of maxillary canine impaction in skeletal class iii malocclusions compared to class i malocclusions |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6461734/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31001397 http://dx.doi.org/10.4317/jced.55478 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT dicarlogabriele prevalenceofmaxillarycanineimpactioninskeletalclassiiimalocclusionscomparedtoclassimalocclusions AT saccuccimatteo prevalenceofmaxillarycanineimpactioninskeletalclassiiimalocclusionscomparedtoclassimalocclusions AT luzzivaleria prevalenceofmaxillarycanineimpactioninskeletalclassiiimalocclusionscomparedtoclassimalocclusions AT ierardogaetano prevalenceofmaxillarycanineimpactioninskeletalclassiiimalocclusionscomparedtoclassimalocclusions AT vozzaiole prevalenceofmaxillarycanineimpactioninskeletalclassiiimalocclusionscomparedtoclassimalocclusions AT sfasciottigianluca prevalenceofmaxillarycanineimpactioninskeletalclassiiimalocclusionscomparedtoclassimalocclusions AT polimeniantonella prevalenceofmaxillarycanineimpactioninskeletalclassiiimalocclusionscomparedtoclassimalocclusions |