The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

Register      Login

SEARCH WITHIN CONTENT

FIND ARTICLE

Volume / Issue

Online First

Archive
Volume  25 (2024)
Volume  24 (2023)
Volume  23 (2022)
Volume  22 (2021)
Volume  21 (2020)
Volume  20 (2019)
Volume  19 (2018)
Volume  18 (2017)
Volume  17 (2016)
Volume  16 (2015)
Volume  15 (2014)
Volume  14 (2013)
Volume  13 (2012)
Volume  12 (2011)
Volume  11 (2010)
Volume  10 (2009)
Volume  9 (2008)
Volume  8 (2007)
Volume  7 (2006)
Volume  6 (2005)
Volume  5 (2004)
Volume  4 (2003)
Volume  3 (2002)
Volume  2 (2001)
Volume  1 (1999)
Related articles

VOLUME 19 , ISSUE 4 ( 2018 ) > List of Articles

ORIGINAL RESEARCH

An Evaluation of Mandibular Dental and Basal Arch Dimensions in Class I and Class II Division 1 Adult Syrian Patients using Cone-beam Computed Tomography

Mohammad Y Hajeer, Layal H Al-Hilal, Kinda Sultan, Ghiath Mahmoud, Abdulrahman A Wanli

Keywords : Basal arch, Class I, Class II-1, Cone-beam computed tomography, Dental arch, Intercanine width, Intermolar width

Citation Information : Hajeer MY, Al-Hilal LH, Sultan K, Mahmoud G, Wanli AA. An Evaluation of Mandibular Dental and Basal Arch Dimensions in Class I and Class II Division 1 Adult Syrian Patients using Cone-beam Computed Tomography. J Contemp Dent Pract 2018; 19 (4):431-437.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-2279

License: CC BY-NC 3.0

Published Online: 01-04-2018

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2018; The Author(s).


Abstract

Aim: The aim of this study is (1) to inspect any difference in mandibular arch widths between males and females in class I and class II division 1 (class II-1) malocclusions using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT), (2) to compare the mandibular dental and basal widths between the two groups, and (3) to investigate any possible correlation between dental and basal arch widths in both groups. Materials and methods: The CBCT images of 68 patients aged between 18 and 25 years consisted of 34 class I (17 males and 17 females) and 34 class II-1 (17 males and 17 females) who were recruited at the Department of Orthodontics, University of Damascus Dental School (Syria). Using on-demand threedimensional (3D) on axial views, facial axis points for dental measurements and basal bone center (BBC) points for basal measurements were identified on lower canines and first molars. Dental and basal intercanine width (ICW) and intermolar width (IMW) were measured. Results: Independent t-test showed a statistically significant difference between males and females in several variables in both groups and a statistically significant difference between class I and class II-1 groups in the basal ICW for both genders and in the dental ICW for females only (p < 0.05). In class I group, Pearson's correlation coefficients between dental and basal measurements showed a strong correlation in the IMW for both genders (r. 0.73; p < 0.01) and a moderate correlation in females' ICW (r = 0.67; p < 0.01). In the class II-1 group, a moderate correlation in females' IMW (r = 0.67; p < 0.01) was found. Conclusion: Females compared with males had narrower dimensions. Class I patients had larger ICW than class II-1 patients in all measurements and had narrower IMW than class II-1 in most measurements for both genders. There were moderate-to-strong correlations between dental and basal dimensions. BBC points might be landmarks that accurately represent the basal bone arch. Clinical significance: CBCT-based assessments of dental and basal arch dimensions provide a great opportunity to accurately evaluate these aspects, to enhance clinicians’ decisions regarding proper tooth movements, and to achieve good dentoalveolar intra-arch harmony.

PDF Share
  1. Ronay V, Miner RM, Will LA, Arai K. Mandibular arch form: the relationship between dental and basal anatomy. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2008 Sep;134(3):430-438.
  2. Ball RL, Miner RM, Will LA, Arai K. Comparison of dental and apical base arch forms in class II division 1 and class I malocclusions. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2010 Jul;138(1):41-50.
  3. Gupta D, Miner RM, Arai K, Will LA. Comparison of the mandibular dental and basal arch forms in adults and children with class I and class II malocclusions. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2010 Jul;138(1):10.e1-10.e8.
  4. Bayome M, Park JH, Han SH, Baek SH, Sameshima GT, Kook YA. Evaluation of dental and basal arch forms using cone-beam CT and 3D virtual models of normal occlusion. Aust Orthod J 2013 May;29(1):43-51.
  5. Suk KE, Park JH, Bayome M, Nam YO, Sameshima GT, Kook YA. Comparison between dental and basal arch forms in normal occlusion and class III malocclusions utilizing cone-beam computed tomography. Korean J Orthod 2013 Feb;43(1):15-22.
  6. Andrews LF. The straight-wire appliance. Br J Orthod 1979 Jul;6(3):125-143.
  7. Al-Khateeb SN, Abu Alhaija ES. Tooth size discrepancies and arch parameters among different malocclusions in a Jordanian sample. Angle Orthod 2006 May;76(3):459-465.
  8. Huth J, Staley RN, Jacobs R, Bigelow H, Jakobsen J. Arch widths in class II-2 adults compared to adults with class II-1 and normal occlusion. Angle Orthod 2007 Sep;77(5): 837-844.
  9. Lundström AF. Malocclusion of the teeth regarded as a problem in connection with the apical base. Int J Orthod Oral Surg Radiogr 1925 Nov;11(11):1022-1042.
  10. Downs WB. Analysis of the dentofacial profile. Angle Orthod 1956 Oct;26(4):191-212.
  11. Howes AE. A polygon portrayal of coronal and basal arch dimensions in the horizontal plane. Am J Orthod 1954 Nov;40(11):811-831.
  12. Rees DJ. A method for assessing the proportional relation of apical bases and contact diameters of the teeth. Am J Orthod 1953 Sep;39(9):695-707.
  13. Sergl HG, Kerr WJ, McColl JH. A method of measuring the apical base. Eur J Orthod 1996 Oct;18(5):479-483.
  14. Andrews LF, Andrews WA. The six elements of orofacial harmony. Andrews J 2000;1:13-22.
  15. Cha BK, Lee YH, Lee NK, Choi DS, Baek SH. Soft tissue thickness for placement of an orthodontic miniscrew using an ultrasonic device. Angle Orthod 2008 May;78(3):403-408.
  16. Andrews, LF. Straight wire: the concept and appliance. San Diego (CA): LA Wells Company; 1989.
  17. Andrews LF. The six keys to normal occlusion. Am J Orthod 1972 Sep;62(3):296-309.
  18. Carlson SK, Johnson E. Bracket positioning and resets: Five steps to align crowns and roots consistently. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2001 Jan;119(1):76-80.
  19. Sayin MO, Turkkahraman H. Comparison of dental arch and alveolar widths of patients with class II, division 1 malocclusion and subjects with class I ideal occlusion. Angle Orthod 2004 Jun;74(3):356-360.
  20. Uysal T, Usumez S, Memili B, Sari Z. Dental and alveolar arch widths in normal occlusion and class III malocclusion. Angle Orthod 2005 Sep;75(5):809-813.
  21. Braun S, Hnat WP, Leschinsky R, Legan HL. An evaluation of the shape of some popular nickel titanium alloy preformed arch wires. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1999 Jul;116(1):1-2.
  22. Nie Q, Lin J. A comparison of dental arch forms between class II division 1 and normal occlusion assessed by Euclidean distance matrix analysis. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2006 Apr;129(4):528-535.
  23. Faul F, Erdfelder E, Lang AG, Buchner A. G*Power 3: a flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behav Res Methods 2007 May;39(2):175-191.
  24. Faul F, Erdfelder E, Buchner A, Lang AG. Statistical power analyses using G*Power 3.1: tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behav Res Methods 2009 Nov;41(4):1149-1160.
  25. Steiner CC. Cephalometrics for you and me. Am J Orthod 1953 Oct;39(10):729-755.
  26. Cevidanes L, Oliveira AE, Motta A, Phillips C, Burke B, Tyndall D. Head orientation in CBCT-generated cephalograms. Angle Orthod 2009 Sep;79(5):971-977.
  27. Knott VB. Longitudinal study of dental arch widths at four stages of dentition. Angle Orthod 1972 Oct;42(4):387-394.
  28. De Koch W. Dental Arch depth and width studied continually from 18 years to adulthood. Am J Orthod 1972 Jul;62(1):56-66.
  29. Bhowmik SG, Hazare PV, Bhowmik H. Correlation of the arch forms of male and female subjects with those of preformed rectangular nickel-titanium archwires. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2012 Sep;142(3):364-373.
  30. Lombardo L, Coppola P, Siciliani G. Comparison of dental and alveolar arch forms between different ethnic groups. Int Orthod 2015 Dec;13(4):462-488.
  31. Hajeer MY. Assessment of dental arches in patients with class II division 1 and division 2 malocclusions using 3D digital models in a Syrian sample. Eur J Paediatr Dent 2014 Jun;15(2):151-157.
  32. Al-Rayes NZ, Hajeer MY. Evaluation of occlusal contacts among different groups of malocclusion using 3D digital models. J Contemp Dent Pract 2014 Jan;15(1):46-55.
  33. Gianelly AA. Rapid palatal expansion in the absence of crossbites: added value? Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 2003 Oct;124(4):362-365.
  34. Coskuner HG, Ciger S. Three-dimensional assessment of the temporomandibular joint and mandibular dimensions after early correction of the maxillary arch form in patients with class II division 1 or division 2 malocclusion. Korean J Orthod 2015 May;45(3):121-129.
  35. Frohlich FJ. A longitudinal study of untreated Class II type malocclusion. Trans Eur Orthod Soc 1961 Feb;47(2):148.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.