European journal of paediatric dentistry · 2015
Association between mesially displaced maxillary first premolars and early displaced maxillary canines.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Mucedero M, Franchi L, Ricchiuti M R, Cozza P
Аннотация
AIM: To evaluate the association between the mesially displaced maxillary first premolar (MDP) and the early displacement of the adjacent permanent canine (EDC) before their eruption.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A sample of 1247 subjects in the intermediate mixed dentition stage was assessed for the presence of MDP and EDC. All subjects were divided into two groups: MDP group and noMDP group. For each subject two angular measurements (premolar-occlusal plane η and л premolar-midline angles) were analysed on panoramic radiographs. The chi-square test with Yates correction was performed to compare the prevalence rate of EDC in MDP (MDP-EDC) and noMDP groups. The statistical comparisons for the values of η and л angles between MDP vs noMDP, MDP vs MDP-EDC, and noMDP vs MDP-EDC groups were performed by means of ANOVA with Bonferroni correction.
RESULTS: The prevalence rate of EDC in the MDP group was significantly greater than in the noMDP group (66% vs. 12.1%). MDP-EDC group showed a significantly larger л angle than in the MDP group resulting in an increased mesial inclination of displaced premolars.
CONCLUSION: MDP can be considered a dental anomaly associated to maxillary canine displacement.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A sample of 1247 subjects in the intermediate mixed dentition stage was assessed for the presence of MDP and EDC. All subjects were divided into two groups: MDP group and noMDP group. For each subject two angular measurements (premolar-occlusal plane η and л premolar-midline angles) were analysed on panoramic radiographs. The chi-square test with Yates correction was performed to compare the prevalence rate of EDC in MDP (MDP-EDC) and noMDP groups. The statistical comparisons for the values of η and л angles between MDP vs noMDP, MDP vs MDP-EDC, and noMDP vs MDP-EDC groups were performed by means of ANOVA with Bonferroni correction.
RESULTS: The prevalence rate of EDC in the MDP group was significantly greater than in the noMDP group (66% vs. 12.1%). MDP-EDC group showed a significantly larger л angle than in the MDP group resulting in an increased mesial inclination of displaced premolars.
CONCLUSION: MDP can be considered a dental anomaly associated to maxillary canine displacement.