Cargando…

Management of maxillary impacted canines: A prospective study of orthodontists' preferences

BACKGROUND: Maxillary canines are considered the most commonly impacted teeth, after the third molars. Orthodontists have different preferences on how to approach maxillary impacted canines (MIC). The objective of this article was to investigate orthodontists’ approach to managing MIC. MATERIAL AND...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Alqahtani, Hamad
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8180458/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34135665
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jsps.2021.03.010
_version_ 1783704002694742016
author Alqahtani, Hamad
author_facet Alqahtani, Hamad
author_sort Alqahtani, Hamad
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Maxillary canines are considered the most commonly impacted teeth, after the third molars. Orthodontists have different preferences on how to approach maxillary impacted canines (MIC). The objective of this article was to investigate orthodontists’ approach to managing MIC. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A cross-sectional study comprising a comprehensive survey with 22 questions was sent to practicing orthodontists. This study explored the preferred diagnostic measures, surgical techniques, materials, and mechanics utilized to manage MIC;104 responses were returned. RESULTS: Palatal impaction was reported to be encountered more often than labial impaction by 60% of the respondents. In 62% of the respondents, an oral and maxillofacial surgeon was the specialist preferred to perform the surgical exposure. In 66%, the choice of required surgical techniques was reported as a joint decision between orthodontists and other specialists who perform the surgery. Cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) was reported to be the diagnostic x-ray of choice. The gold button with a chain was the preferred bonded attachment in 86% of cases. Less than half of the respondents bonded the attachments themselves during surgical exposure. A clear plastic retainer was the preferred retainer in 61% of the respondents, and 43% of the respondents tended to use a closed exposure technique. Coe-pak(TM) was the preferred surgical pack for orthodontists who prefer an open exposure technique. Piggyback (double wire) was the preferable mechanic to move a palatally impacted canine. CONCLUSION: Our findings indicate that there are variations among orthodontists on how to manage MICs in terms of diagnostic methods, surgical management, materials, and mechanics.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8180458
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Elsevier
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-81804582021-06-15 Management of maxillary impacted canines: A prospective study of orthodontists' preferences Alqahtani, Hamad Saudi Pharm J Original Article BACKGROUND: Maxillary canines are considered the most commonly impacted teeth, after the third molars. Orthodontists have different preferences on how to approach maxillary impacted canines (MIC). The objective of this article was to investigate orthodontists’ approach to managing MIC. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A cross-sectional study comprising a comprehensive survey with 22 questions was sent to practicing orthodontists. This study explored the preferred diagnostic measures, surgical techniques, materials, and mechanics utilized to manage MIC;104 responses were returned. RESULTS: Palatal impaction was reported to be encountered more often than labial impaction by 60% of the respondents. In 62% of the respondents, an oral and maxillofacial surgeon was the specialist preferred to perform the surgical exposure. In 66%, the choice of required surgical techniques was reported as a joint decision between orthodontists and other specialists who perform the surgery. Cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) was reported to be the diagnostic x-ray of choice. The gold button with a chain was the preferred bonded attachment in 86% of cases. Less than half of the respondents bonded the attachments themselves during surgical exposure. A clear plastic retainer was the preferred retainer in 61% of the respondents, and 43% of the respondents tended to use a closed exposure technique. Coe-pak(TM) was the preferred surgical pack for orthodontists who prefer an open exposure technique. Piggyback (double wire) was the preferable mechanic to move a palatally impacted canine. CONCLUSION: Our findings indicate that there are variations among orthodontists on how to manage MICs in terms of diagnostic methods, surgical management, materials, and mechanics. Elsevier 2021-05 2021-03-31 /pmc/articles/PMC8180458/ /pubmed/34135665 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jsps.2021.03.010 Text en © 2021 The Author. Published by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of King Saud University. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Original Article
Alqahtani, Hamad
Management of maxillary impacted canines: A prospective study of orthodontists' preferences
title Management of maxillary impacted canines: A prospective study of orthodontists' preferences
title_full Management of maxillary impacted canines: A prospective study of orthodontists' preferences
title_fullStr Management of maxillary impacted canines: A prospective study of orthodontists' preferences
title_full_unstemmed Management of maxillary impacted canines: A prospective study of orthodontists' preferences
title_short Management of maxillary impacted canines: A prospective study of orthodontists' preferences
title_sort management of maxillary impacted canines: a prospective study of orthodontists' preferences
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8180458/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34135665
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jsps.2021.03.010
work_keys_str_mv AT alqahtanihamad managementofmaxillaryimpactedcaninesaprospectivestudyoforthodontistspreferences