Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Evaluation of maxillary arch morphology in children with unilaterally impacted incisors via three-dimensional analysis of digital dental casts: a controlled study

Evaluierung der Morphologie des Oberkieferbogens bei Kindern mit unilateral impaktierten Inzisiven mittels 3D-Analyse digitaler dentaler Abformungen: Eine kontrollierte Studie

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Journal of Orofacial Orthopedics / Fortschritte der Kieferorthopädie Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objective

The purpose of this work was to analyze variations in maxillary arch dimensions in subjects presenting unilaterally impacted maxillary permanent central incisors compared with a control group of subjects without eruption anomalies.

Methods

A group of 23 Caucasian children [8 females and 15 males, mean age 9.7 years, standard deviation (SD) 1.6 years] displaying unilaterally impacted maxillary permanent central incisors (impacted incisor group: IIG) were compared with a control group (CG) of 23 subjects (9 females; 14 males, mean age 8.8 years, SD 1.9 years) presenting no eruption disorders. Pretreatment dental casts were taken from each subject and the upper arch was scanned using a three-dimensional scanner. Linear measurements were taken on each digital model to analyze maxillary arch dimensions. Significant between-group differences were tested with the Student’s t test (p < 0.05).

Results

The transverse and sagittal upper-arch measurements were significantly smaller in the IIG than in the CG. In particular, the anterior arch was 1.35 mm shorter in the IIG, while intercanine width was decreased by 2.51 mm on the impacted side.

Conclusion

Children revealing unilaterally impacted maxillary central incisors demonstrated a significantly constricted maxillary transverse width and shorter arch on the impacted side compared with subjects with no eruption disorders.

Zusammenfassung

Ziel

Die Zielsetzung der Studie war die Analyse dimensionaler Variationen in den Oberkieferbögen von Kindern mit einseitig impaktierten permanenten zentralen Inzisiven im Vergleich mit einer Kontrollgruppe ohne Durchbruchsanomalien.

Methoden

Eine Gruppe von 23 kaukasischen Kindern [8 Mädchen, 15 Jungen, Durchschnittsalter 9,7, Standardabweichung (SD) 1,6 Jahre] mit einseitig impaktierten bleibenden zentralen Inzisiven (“impacted incisor group”, IIG) wurde verglichen mit einer Kontrollgruppe (“control group”, CG; 9 Mädchen, 14 Jungen, Durchschnittsalter 8,8, SD 1,9 Jahre) ohne Durchbruchsstörungen. Vor der Behandlung wurden von jedem Individuum Zahnabdrücke erstellt, der obere Bogen wurde dreidimensional gescannt. Zur Analyse der Oberkieferbogendimensionen wurde jedes digitale Modell linear vermessen. Signifikante Differenzen (p < 0,05) wurden mit dem Student-t-Test überprüft.

Ergebnisse

In der IIG erwiesen sich die transversalen und die sagittalen Messungen als signifikant geringer als in der CG. Vor allem der vordere Bogen war 1,35 mm kürzer in der IIG, während die intercanine Distanz auf der Seite der Impaktierung 2,51 mm geringer war.

Schlussfolgerung

Bei Kindern mit einseitig impaktierten zentralen Inzisiven im Oberkiefer zeigten sich im Vergleich mit Kindern ohne Eruptionsanomalie eine signifikant verengte Oberkieferbreite und ein kürzerer Bogen auf der Seite der Impaktierung.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Ahn JS, Park MS, Song HC et al (2012) Three-dimensional interpretation of intercanine width change in children: a 9-year longitudinal study. Am J Orthod 142:323–332

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Armi P, Cozza P, Baccetti T (2011) Effect of RME and headgear treatment on the eruption of palatally displaced canines. A randomized clinical study. Angle Orthod 81:370–374

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Baccetti T, Mucedero M, Leonardi M et al (2009) Interceptive treatment of palatal impaction of maxillary canines with rapid maxillary expansion. A randomized clinical trial. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 136:657–661

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Bishara SE (1971) Treatment of unerupted incisors. Am J Orthod 59:443–447

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Chokron A, Reveret S, Salmon B et al (2010) Strategies for treating an impacted maxillary central incisor. Int Orthod 8:152–176

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Cohen J (1992) A power primer. Psychol Bull 112:155–159

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Henrikson J, Persson M, Thilander B (2001) Long-term stability of dental arch form in normal occlusion from 13 to 31 years of age. Eur J Orthod 23:51–61

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Hitchin AD (1970) The impacted maxillary incisor. Dent Pract Dent Rec 20:423–433

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Jones JW (1999) A medico-legal review of some current UK guidelines in orthodontics: a personal view. J Orthod 26:307–324

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Kolokitha OE, Papadopoulou AK (2008) Impaction and apical root angulation of the maxillary central incisors due to supernumerary teeth: Combined surgical and orthodontic treatment. Case report. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 134:153–160

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Law LS (2013) Management of premature primary tooth loss in the child patients. CDA J 41:612–618

    Google Scholar 

  12. Lightheart KG, English JD, Kau CH et al (2012) Surface analysis of study models generated from Ortho CAD and cone-beam computed tomography imaging. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 141:686–693

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. McConnell TL, Hoffman DL, Forbes DP et al (1996) Maxillary canine impaction in patients with transverse maxillary deficiency. ASDC J Dent Child 63:190–195

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Pavoni C, Franchi L, Laganà G et al (2013) Management of impacted incisors following surgery to remove obstacles to eruption: a prospective clinical trial. Pediatr Dent 35:364–368

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Pavoni C, Franchi L, Laganà G et al (2013) Radiographic assessment of maxillary incisor position after rapid maxillary expansion in children with clinical signs of eruption disorder. J Orofac Orthop 74:468–479

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Petren S, Bondemark L (2008) Correction of unilateral posterior crossbite in the mixed dentition: a randomized controlled trial. Am J Orthod 133:790e7–e13

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Primozic J, Baccetti T, Franchi L et al (2013) Threedimensional assessment of palatal change in a controlled study of unilateral posterior crossbite correction in the primary dentition. Eur J Orthod 35:199–204

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Primozic J, Richmond S, Kau CH et al (2013) Three-dimensional evaluation of early crossbite correction: a longitudinal study. Eur J Orthod 35:7–13

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Sjögren AP, Lindgren JE, Huggare JA (2010) Orthodontic study cast analysis-reproducibility of recordings and agreement between conventional and 3D virtual measurements. J Digit Imaging 23:482–492

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Sousa MV, Vasconcelos EC, Janson G et al (2012) Accuracy and reproducibility of 3-dimensional digital model measurements. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 142:269–273

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Springate SD (1983) The effect of sample size and bias on the reliability of estimates of error: a comparative study of Dahlberg’s formula. Am J Orthod 83:382–390

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Vanarsdall RL, Corn H (1977) Soft-tissue management of labially positioned unerupted teeth. Am J Orthod 72:53–64

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Zilberman O, Huggare JAV, Parakakis KA (2003) Evaluation of the validity of tooth size measurements using conventional and three dimensional virtual orthodontic models. Angle Orthod 73:301–306

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Orthodontics, University of Rome ‘Tor Vergata’, Rome, Italy

    Chiara Pavoni & Paola Cozza

  2. Department of Dentistry, UNSBC, Tirana, Albania

    Chiara Pavoni & Paola Cozza

  3. Department of Orthodontics, University of Florence, Florence, Italy

    Lorenzo Franchi & Marco Buongiorno

  4. Department of Surgery and Translational Medicine, Università degli Studi di Firenze, Via del Ponte di Mezzo, 46-48, 50127, Florence, Italy

    Lorenzo Franchi

Authors
  1. Chiara Pavoni
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Lorenzo Franchi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Marco Buongiorno
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Paola Cozza
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lorenzo Franchi.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

Chiara Pavoni, Lorenzo Franchi, Marco Buongiorno, and Paola Cozza have no conflict of interest.

All studies on humans described in the present manuscript were carried out with the approval of the responsible ethics committee and in accordance with national law and the Helsinki Declaration of 1975 (in its current, revised form). Informed consent was obtained from all patients included in studies. In the case of underage patients, consent was obtained from a parent or legal guardian.

Additional information

L. Franchi: DDS, PhD.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Pavoni, C., Franchi, L., Buongiorno, M. et al. Evaluation of maxillary arch morphology in children with unilaterally impacted incisors via three-dimensional analysis of digital dental casts: a controlled study. J Orofac Orthop 77, 16–21 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00056-015-0003-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00056-015-0003-3

Keywords

Schlüsselwörter

Search

Navigation