HEAD AND NECK RADIOLOGY / ORIGINAL PAPER
Morphological evaluation of maxillary arch in unilateral buccally and palatally impacted canines: a cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT)-based study in Northern Iran
1
Dental Sciences Research Centre, Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences, Sari, Iran
2
Department of Orthodontic, Dental Faculty, Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences, Sari, Iran
3
Student Research Committee, Dental Faculty, Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences, Sari, Iran
4
Gastrointestinal Cancer Research Centre, Noncommunicable Diseases Institute, Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences, Sari, Iran
Submission date: 2024-03-31
Final revision date: 2024-05-03
Acceptance date: 2024-05-14
Publication date: 2024-06-28
Corresponding author
Farhad Sobouti
Farhad Sobouti, Dental Sciences Research Center, Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences, Sari, Iran, phone: +989123226518, e-mail: farhad_sobouti@yahoo.com
Farhad Sobouti, Dental Sciences Research Center, Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences, Sari, Iran, phone: +989123226518, e-mail: farhad_sobouti@yahoo.com
Pol J Radiol, 2024; 89: 316-323
KEYWORDS
TOPICS
ABSTRACT
Purpose:
This study investigated the association between the maxillary impacted canines’ position and the maxilla’s morphological features in an Iranian population based on cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) images.
Material and methods:
In this cross-sectional descriptive-analytical study, 47 CBCT images of unilateral buccally impacted maxillary canines and 47 CBCT images of unilateral palatally impacted maxillary canines were examined. Several morphological variables were compared between the impacted and non-impacted sides, and between the buccal and palatal impaction types.
Results:
Gender and age were not significantly associated with the canine impaction type. The alveolar bone height at the impacted side was significantly greater in the buccally impacted group than in the palatally impacted group (p = 0.016). In a comparison of the impacted and non-impacted sides, all variables of alveolar bone thickness at depth of 2 mm, maxillary arch width, and palatal volume had significantly smaller values in the impacted side in both buccally and palatally impacted groups (p < 0.05). The alveolar bone was significantly thicker at the depth of 10 mm in the impacted side of the buccal group (p = 0.024). The maxillary arch perimeter was significantly smaller in the impacted side of the buccal group (p = 0.008). The palatal depth did not significantly differ between the groups.
Conclusions:
Among the studied variables, the alveolar bone thickness showed contrary results at different depths. The palatal volume and maxillary arch width were significantly smaller on the impacted side in both buccal and palatal groups, and the arch perimeter showed the same results only in the buccal group.
This study investigated the association between the maxillary impacted canines’ position and the maxilla’s morphological features in an Iranian population based on cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) images.
Material and methods:
In this cross-sectional descriptive-analytical study, 47 CBCT images of unilateral buccally impacted maxillary canines and 47 CBCT images of unilateral palatally impacted maxillary canines were examined. Several morphological variables were compared between the impacted and non-impacted sides, and between the buccal and palatal impaction types.
Results:
Gender and age were not significantly associated with the canine impaction type. The alveolar bone height at the impacted side was significantly greater in the buccally impacted group than in the palatally impacted group (p = 0.016). In a comparison of the impacted and non-impacted sides, all variables of alveolar bone thickness at depth of 2 mm, maxillary arch width, and palatal volume had significantly smaller values in the impacted side in both buccally and palatally impacted groups (p < 0.05). The alveolar bone was significantly thicker at the depth of 10 mm in the impacted side of the buccal group (p = 0.024). The maxillary arch perimeter was significantly smaller in the impacted side of the buccal group (p = 0.008). The palatal depth did not significantly differ between the groups.
Conclusions:
Among the studied variables, the alveolar bone thickness showed contrary results at different depths. The palatal volume and maxillary arch width were significantly smaller on the impacted side in both buccal and palatal groups, and the arch perimeter showed the same results only in the buccal group.
REFERENCES (37)
1.
Alqerban A, Storms AS, Voet M, Fieuws S, Willems G. Early prediction of maxillary canine impaction. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2016; 45: 20150232. DOI: 10.1259/dmfr.20150232.
2.
Laurenziello M, Montaruli G, Gallo C, Tepedino M, Guida L, Perillo L, et al. Determinants of maxillary canine impaction: retrospective clinical and radiographic study. J Clin Exp Dent 2017; 9: e1304-e1309. DOI: 10.4317/jced.54095.
3.
Archer WH. Oral and maxillofacial surgery. 5th ed. Philadelphia, PA: WB Saunders; 1975, p. 325.
4.
Ortiz PM, Tabbaa S, Flores-Mir C, Al-Jewair T. A CBCT investigation of the association between sella-turcica bridging and maxillary palatal canine impaction. Biomed Res Int 2018; 2018: 4329050. DOI: 10.1155/2018/4329050.
5.
Mitsea A, Palikaraki G, Karamesinis K, Vastardis H, Gizani S, Sifakakis I. Evaluation of lateral incisor resorption caused by impacted maxillary canines based on CBCT: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Children 2022; 9: 1006. DOI: 10.3390/children907-1006.
6.
Chen J, Lv D, Li M, Zhao W, He Y. The correlation between the three-dimensional radiolucency area around the crown of impacted maxillary canines and dentigerous cysts. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2020; 49: 20190402. DOI: 10.1259/dmfr.20190402.
7.
Stabryła J, Zadurska M, Plakwicz P, Kukuła KT, Czochrowska EM. Comparisons of dental anomalies in orthodontic patients with impacted maxillary and mandibular canines. Diagnostics 2023; 13: 2766. DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics13172766.
8.
Sobouti F, Aryana M, Ghadiri SM, Modanloo K, Dadgar S. Relationship between craniovertebral abnormalities and maxillary lateral incisors agenesis: a case-control study. Int J Dent 2022; 2022: 3389741. DOI: 10.1155/2022/3389741.
9.
Mohammed OF, Mahmood AD. Investigating the correlation between palatal depth and width measurements in impacted maxillary canine patients by using cone beam computed tomography. JODR 2018; 5: 32-39.
10.
Servais JA, Gaalaas L, Lunos S, Beiraghi S, Larson BE, Leon-Salazar V. Alternative cone-beam computed tomography method for the analysis of bone density around impacted maxillary canines. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 2018; 154: 442-449.
11.
Kritzler K. CBCT imaging vs conventional radiography. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 2017; 152: 146-148.
12.
Dadgar S, Alimohamadi M, Rajabi N, Rakhshan V, Sobouti F. Associations among palatal impaction of canine, sella turcica bridging, and ponticulus posticus (atlas arcuate foramen). Surg Radiol Anatomy 2021; 43: 93-99.
13.
Bizzarro M, Generali C, Maietta S, Martorelli M, Ferrillo M, Flores-Mir C, et al. Association between 3D palatal morphology and upper arch dimensions in buccally displaced maxillary canines early in mixed dentition. Eur J Orthodont 2018; 40: 592-596.
14.
Hong WH, Radfar R, Chung CH. Relationship between the maxillary transverse dimension and palatally displaced canines: a cone-beam computed tomographic study. Angle Orthodont 2015; 85: 440-445.
15.
Yan B, Sun Z, Fields H, Wang L, Luo L. Etiologic factors for buccal and palatal maxillary canine impaction: a perspective based on cone-beam computed tomography analyses. Am J Orthodont Dentofac Orthoped 2013; 143: 527-534.
16.
Mehta F, Jain M, Verma S, Basha S, Patel RA, Trivedi R, et al. Morphological comparison of the maxillary arch in buccal and palatal canine impaction among Asian population of Gujarati origin: a hospital-based study. Healthcare (Basel) 2022: 10: 939. DOI: 10.3390/healthcare10050939. .
17.
Dost H, Ehsan AA, Sakrani H, Munir S, Lal A, Ahmed N, et al. The analysis of intermolar width and skeletal base class as a predictor of potential maxillary canine impaction in permanent dentition: a cross-sectional study. Global Pediatric Health 2024; 11: 2333794X241235541. DOI: 10.1177/2333794X241235541.
18.
Alshalawi IA, Alnahad DM, Ardah HI, Aboelmaaty WM, Alrejaye NS. Evaluation of maxillary transverse dimensions in individuals with a unilaterally impacted canine. J Orthodont Sci 2024; 13: 6. DOI: 10.4103/jos.jos_129_23.
19.
Saiar M, Rebellato J, Sheats RD. Palatal displacement of canines and maxillary skeletal width. Am J Orthodont Dentofac Orthoped 2006; 129: 511-519.
20.
Schindel RH, Duffy SL. Maxillary transverse discrepancies and potentially impacted maxillary canines in mixed-dentition patients. Angle Orthodont 2007; 77: 430-435.
21.
Tadinada A, Mahdian M, Vishwanath M, Allareddy V, Upadhyay M, Yadav S. Evaluation of alveolar bone dimensions in unilateral palatally impacted canine: a cone-beam computed tomographic analyses. Eur J Orthodont 2015; 37: 596-602.
22.
Kim Y, Hyun HK, Jang KT. Interrelationship between the position of impacted maxillary canines and the morphology of the maxilla. Am J Orthodont Dentofac Orthoped 2012; 141: 556-562.
23.
Shahin SY, Tabassum A, Fairozekhan AT, Al Tuwaylib A, Al-Sheyoukh S, Alzaher S, et al. The relationship between unilateral palatal maxillary canine impaction and the morphology of the maxilla: a CBCT study in eastern province of Saudi Arabia. Eur J Dent 2022; 17: 1043-1050.
24.
Al-Nimri K, Gharaibeh T. Space conditions and dental and occlusal features in patients with palatally impacted maxillary canines: an aetiological study. Eur J Orthodont 2005; 27: 461-465.
25.
Al-Khateeb S, Abu Alhaija ES, Rwaite A, Burqan BA. Dental arch parameters of the displacement and nondisplacement sides in subjects with unilateral palatal canine ectopia. Angle Orthodont 2013; 83: 259-265.
26.
Anic-Milosevic S, Varga S, Mestrovic S, Lapter-Varga M, Slaj M. Dental and occlusal features in patients with palatally displaced maxillary canines. Eur J Orthodont 2009; 31: 367-373.
27.
D’Oleo-Aracena MF, Arriola-Guillén LE, Rodríguez-Cárdenas YA, Ruíz-Mora GA. Skeletal and dentoalveolar bilateral dimensions in unilateral palatally impacted canine using cone beam computed tomography. Progress Orthodont 2017; 18: 7. DOI: 10.1186/s40510-017-0160-6.
28.
Salem CQ, Delgado ER, Reinoso PAC, Robalino JJ. Alveolar ridge preservation: a review of concepts and controversies. Natl J Maxillofac Surg 2023; 14: 167-176.
29.
Wei Y, Zhao L, Zhang H, Han Z, Hu W, Xu T. Ridge preservation in periodontally compromised molar sockets with and without primary wound closure: a comparative controlled clinical trial. Clin Oral Implants Res 2024; 35: 131-139.
30.
Jacoby H. The etiology of maxillary canine impactions. Am J Orthodont 1983; 84: 125-132.
31.
Stellzig A, Basdra E, Komposch G. On the etiology of upper canine impaction – a space analysis. Fortschr Kieferorthop 1994; 55: 97-103 [Article in German].
32.
Miresmaeili A, Shokri A, Salemi F, Dehghani F, Shahidi-Zandi V, Rad R, et al. Morphology of maxilla in patients with palatally displaced canines. Int Orthodont 2019; 17: 130-135.
33.
Yassaei S, Safi Y, Valian F, Mohammadi A. Evaluation of maxillary arch width and palatal volume and depth in patients with maxillary impacted canine by CBCT. Heliyon 2022; 8: e10854. DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e10854.
34.
Fattahi H, Ghaeed F, Alipour A. Association between maxillary canine impaction and arch dimensions. Aust Orthod J 2012; 28: 57-62.
35.
Salim V, Peter E, Ani GS. What are the intra-arch risk factors for palatally displaced maxillary canine? – results of a case-control study. J Orthodont Sci 2022; 11: 48. DOI: 10.4103/jos.jos_168_21.
36.
Hirschhaut M, Leon N, Gross H, Flores-Mir C. Guidance for the Clinical Management of Impacted Maxillary Canines. Compend Contin Educ Dent 2021; 42: 220-226; quiz 228.
37.
Grybienė V, Juozėnaitė D, Kubiliūtė K. Diagnostic methods and treatment strategies of impacted maxillary canines: a literature review. Stomatologija 2019; 21: 3-12.
We process personal data collected when visiting the website. The function of obtaining information about users and their behavior is carried out by voluntarily entered information in forms and saving cookies in end devices. Data, including cookies, are used to provide services, improve the user experience and to analyze the traffic in accordance with the Privacy policy. Data are also collected and processed by Google Analytics tool (more).
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
