International orthodontics · 2017
Associations between occlusion, jaw relationships, craniofacial dimensions and the occurrence of palatally-displaced canines.
СтатьяНазвание 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.
Amini Fariborz, Hamedi Shayesteh, Haji Ghadimi Mona, Rakhshan Vahid
Аннотация
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Cephalometric and arch measurements might predict the occurrence of a palatally-displaced impacted maxillary canine (PDC). Despite their clinical importance, studies in this regard are limited and controversial.
METHODS: In this case-control study, 35 PDC patients and 77 controls aged over 13 years were examined. Eleven cephalometric measurements: N-S, ANS-PNS, ANS-N, S-N-ANS, facial angle (FH/NPog), SNA, SNB, Y-axis (SN/SGn), gonial angle, Go-Gn/SN, and Jarabak Index were performed. The maxillary and mandibular intermolar and interpremolar widths were measured. Patients' sagittal skeletal relationships and centric occlusions (molar) were measured by radiographic and cast examinations. The differences between the two groups in terms of the above-mentioned cephalometric and anatomic variables were assessed using Chi2 and Mann-Whitney U-tests (α=0.05).
RESULTS: Chi2 showed a significant negative association between dentoalveolar class I (molar) and PDC occurrence (P=0.018), but not between PDC and skeletal sagittal relationships. Facial angle (FH/NPog) and Y-axis (SN/SGn) were more obtuse in patients with PDC (P<0.05). No arch dimensions differed between the two groups.
CONCLUSIONS: PDC tends to accompany molar class II/III but is not associated with upper or lower jaw widths or lengths. Vertical dimensions might be smaller in PDC patients. Some variables were inconclusive and need future assessments.
METHODS: In this case-control study, 35 PDC patients and 77 controls aged over 13 years were examined. Eleven cephalometric measurements: N-S, ANS-PNS, ANS-N, S-N-ANS, facial angle (FH/NPog), SNA, SNB, Y-axis (SN/SGn), gonial angle, Go-Gn/SN, and Jarabak Index were performed. The maxillary and mandibular intermolar and interpremolar widths were measured. Patients' sagittal skeletal relationships and centric occlusions (molar) were measured by radiographic and cast examinations. The differences between the two groups in terms of the above-mentioned cephalometric and anatomic variables were assessed using Chi2 and Mann-Whitney U-tests (α=0.05).
RESULTS: Chi2 showed a significant negative association between dentoalveolar class I (molar) and PDC occurrence (P=0.018), but not between PDC and skeletal sagittal relationships. Facial angle (FH/NPog) and Y-axis (SN/SGn) were more obtuse in patients with PDC (P<0.05). No arch dimensions differed between the two groups.
CONCLUSIONS: PDC tends to accompany molar class II/III but is not associated with upper or lower jaw widths or lengths. Vertical dimensions might be smaller in PDC patients. Some variables were inconclusive and need future assessments.