Progress in orthodontics · 2026
Relationship between root formation progress of adjacent teeth and external root resorption associated with impacted maxillary canines: a retrospective cross-sectional CBCT study.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Mizoguchi Yukari, Ishida Yuji, Ishizaki-Terauchi Aiko, Shimizu-Tomoda Chiyo, Ono Takashi
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: This study aimed to clarify the involvement of the root formation stage and apical foramen diameter (AFD) of adjacent teeth in the occurrence of external root resorption (ERR) associated with impacted maxillary canines (IMCs), and to identify novel risk indicators for more accurate clinical prediction.
METHODS: Forty patients with IMCs (58 canines) who underwent cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) between May 2017 and October 2022 were retrospectively analyzed. The developmental status was assessed using the root formation stage and AFD of the central incisor (U1), lateral incisor (U2), and first premolar (U4). Additionally, spatial factors, including inter-root distance and the 3D position of the IMC, were evaluated in relation to ERR.
RESULTS: ERR was detected in 72.5% of patients, affecting 37.1% of all examined adjacent teeth. Among the affected teeth, U2 showed the highest incidence (65.3%), followed by U1 (28.6%) and U4 (6.1%). In exploratory tooth-level comparisons, AFD was smaller in the ERR group for U1 and U4. In the supplementary affected-side-level mixed-effects analysis, no statistically significant independent association was demonstrated between maximum AFD and side-level ERR occurrence.
CONCLUSIONS: Developmental indicators, including AFD, may provide clinically relevant information when assessing ERR associated with IMCs. These indicators should be interpreted as potential modifying factors in conjunction with established spatial relationships rather than as independent predictive markers.
METHODS: Forty patients with IMCs (58 canines) who underwent cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) between May 2017 and October 2022 were retrospectively analyzed. The developmental status was assessed using the root formation stage and AFD of the central incisor (U1), lateral incisor (U2), and first premolar (U4). Additionally, spatial factors, including inter-root distance and the 3D position of the IMC, were evaluated in relation to ERR.
RESULTS: ERR was detected in 72.5% of patients, affecting 37.1% of all examined adjacent teeth. Among the affected teeth, U2 showed the highest incidence (65.3%), followed by U1 (28.6%) and U4 (6.1%). In exploratory tooth-level comparisons, AFD was smaller in the ERR group for U1 and U4. In the supplementary affected-side-level mixed-effects analysis, no statistically significant independent association was demonstrated between maximum AFD and side-level ERR occurrence.
CONCLUSIONS: Developmental indicators, including AFD, may provide clinically relevant information when assessing ERR associated with IMCs. These indicators should be interpreted as potential modifying factors in conjunction with established spatial relationships rather than as independent predictive markers.