Evaluation of Leeway Space in Children and Adolescents Living in the Western Mediterranean Region of Türkiye

Abstract

Objectives This study aimed to determine the amount of Leeway space (LWS) in children and adolescents in the mixed dentition period living in the Western Mediterranean Region, to compare these values between the maxilla and mandible and between the right and left quadrants, and to contribute to the establishment of region-specific reference data. Materials and Methods This study was conducted by screening the archives of the Departments of Pediatric Dentistry and Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Akdeniz University. A total of 927 patients aged 6–10 years, in the mixed dentition period and with suitable orthodontic models and orthopantomographic radiographs, were included. Of these patients, 486 were male and 441 were female. The mesiodistal crown widths of primary canines and molars were measured on orthodontic models using a digital calliper, whereas those of unerupted permanent canines and premolars were calculated from orthopantomographic radiographs, and the difference was evaluated. Results In all quadrants, the total mesiodistal width of primary canines and molars was greater than that of permanent canines and premolars. In the maxilla, LWS was 0.60583 mm in the right quadrant and 0.60777 mm in the left quadrant. In the mandible, LWS was 1.68058 mm in the right quadrant and 1.67379 mm in the left quadrant. Right and left quadrant values were similar, whereas LWS was more pronounced in the mandible than in the maxilla. In general, tooth dimensions obtained from girls, and therefore LWS, were statistically significantly lower than those obtained from boys. Conclusion LWS was determined in children and adolescents in the Western Mediterranean Region of Turkiye, and comparison with accessible literature clearly demonstrated regional differences. Considering these differences, careful evaluation of arch length changes during the mixed dentition period and accurate analysis of LWS are clinically important for the early prediction of future orthodontic problems.

Keywords

• Leeway Space
• Pediatric Dentistry
• Preventive Orthodontics

Supporting Institution

The authors declared that this study has received no financial support.

Ethical Statement

Ethical approval was not required, as this study was not conducted on humans or animals.

Batı Akdeniz Bölgesi Çocuk ve Adolesanlarda Leeway Yer Rezervinin Araştırılması

Abstract

Amaç Bu çalışmanın amacı, Batı Akdeniz Bölgesi’nde yaşayan karışık dişlenme dönemindeki çocuk ve adolesan bireylerde Leeway yer rezervi (LYR) miktarını belirlemek, bu değerleri alt ve üst çene ile sağ ve sol kadranlar açısından karşılaştırmak ve bölgeye özgü referans verilerin oluşturulmasına katkı sağlamaktır. Gereç ve Yöntemler Çalışmaya, Akdeniz Üniversitesi Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi Pedodonti ve Ortodonti Anabilim Dallarına ait arşivler taranarak, 6–10 yaş aralığında, karışık dişlenme döneminde bulunan, ortodontik modeli ve ortopantomografik radyografisi uygun olan, toplam 927 hasta dahil edilmiştir. Olguların 486’sı erkek, 441’i kızdır. Süt kanin ve süt molar dişlerin mezyodistal kuron genişlikleri ortodontik modeller üzerinde dijital kumpas ile ölçülmüş; henüz sürmemiş daimi kanin ve premolar dişlerin mezyodistal genişlikleri ise ortopantomografik radyografiler üzerinden hesaplanmış ve arasındaki fark değerlendirilmiştir. Bulgular Tüm kadranlarda süt kanin ve molar dişlerin toplam mezyodistal genişliği, daimi kanin ve premolar dişlerin toplam mezyodistal genişliğinden daha yüksek bulunmuştur. Üst çene sağ kadranda LYR 0,60583 mm, üst çene sol kadranda 0,60777 mm olarak saptanmıştır. Alt çene sağ kadranda bu değer 1,68058 mm, alt çene sol kadranda ise 1,67379 mm olarak bulunmuştur. Sağ ve sol kadranlar arasında benzer değerler elde edilirken, alt çenede saptanan LYR’nin üst çeneye göre daha belirgin olduğu görülmüştür. Genel olarak kızlardan elden edilen diş boyutlarının ve dolayısıyla LYR’nin erkeklere göre istatistiksel olarak anlamlı derecede daha az olduğu tespit edilmiştir. Sonuç Çalışmamız sonucunda Batı Akdeniz Bölgesi çocuk ve adölesanlarda LYR belirlenmiş olup konu ile ilgili erişilebilir kaynaklardan elde edilen literatür sonuçları ile sonuçlarımız karşılaştırıldığında bölgesel farklılıkların olduğu açıkça ortaya konmuştur. Bölgesel farklılıklar göz önünde bulundurularak karışık dişlenme döneminde ark uzunluğu değişimlerinin dikkatle değerlendirilmesi ve LYR’nin doğru analiz edilmesi, ileride oluşabilecek ortodontik problemlerin erken dönemde öngörülmesi açısından büyük klinik önem taşımaktadır

Keywords

• Leeway Yer Rezervi
• Çocuk Diş Hekimliği
• Koruyucu Ortodonti

References

1. Proffit WR, Fields HW, Larson BE, Sarver DM. Contemporary Orthodontics. 6th ed. Elsevier, Philadelphia, 2019.
2. Proffit WR. On the aetiology of malocclusion. The Northcroft lecture, 1985 presented to the British Society for the Study of Orthodontics, Oxford, April 18, 1985. Br J Orthod. 1986; 13: 1-11.
3. Okeson JP. Management of Temporomandibular Disorders and Occlusion. 7th ed. Mosby, St. Louis, 2012, p. 488.
4. Moorrees CFA, Reed RB. Biometrics of crowding and spacing of the teeth in the mandible. Am J Phys Anthropol. 1954; 12: 77-88.
5. Bishara SE, ed. Textbook of Orthodontics. 1st ed. W.B. Saunders, Philadelphia, 2001, p.592.
6. Bishara SE. Class II malocclusions: diagnostic and clinical considerations with and without treatment. Semin Orthod. 2006; 12: 11-24. doi:10.1053/j.sodo.2005.10.005
7. Moyers RE. Handbook of Orthodontics for the Student and General Practitioner. 3rd ed. Yearbook Medical Publishers, Chicago, 1973, p. 778.
8. Nance HN. The limitations of orthodontic treatment: I. Mixed dentition diagnosis and treatment. Am J Orthod Oral Surg. 1947; 33: 177-223.

9. Baharoğlu SE. Toplumumuzda Karma Dişlenme Dönemindeki Normal Okluzyonlu Çocuklarda Sürekli 1. Molarların Kapanışlarının ve Leeway Yer Rezervlerinin Araştırılması. Doktora tezi, Ankara, Ankara Üniversitesi Sağlık Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Pedodonti Anabilim Dalı; 2012.
10. Ülgen M. Ortodonti: Anomaliler, Sefalometri, Etiyoloji, Büyüme ve Gelişim, Tanı. Ankara: Ankara Üniversitesi Basımevi; 2006.
11. Fisk RO. Normal mandibular arch changes between ages 9-16. J Can Dent Assoc. 1966; 32: 652-8.
12. Steigman S, Harari D, Kuraita-Landman S. Relationship between mesiodistal crown diameter of posterior deciduous and succedaneous teeth in Israeli children. Eur J Orthod. 1982; 4: 219-27. doi: 10.1093/ejo/4.3.219
13. Seipel CM. Variation of Tooth Position: A Metric Study of Variation and Adaptation in the Deciduous and Permanent Dentitions. Lund: Ohlsson, 1946. Svensk Tandläkare-Tidskrift Supplementum 39.
14. Brown T, Margetts B, Townsend GC. Comparison of mesiodistal crown diameters of the deciduous and permanent teeth in Australian Aboriginals. Aust Dent J. 1980; 25: 28-33. doi: 10.1111/j.1834-7819.1980.tb03660.x
15. Bishara SE, Hoppens BJ, Jakobsen JR, et al. Changes in the molar relationship between the deciduous and permanent dentitions: a longitudinal study. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1988; 93: 19-28. doi: 10.1016/0889-5406(88)90189-8
16. Clinch L. Symposium on aspects of the dental development of the child. 1. The development of the deciduous and mixed dentitions. Dent Pract Dent Rec. 1966; 17: 135-44.
17. Clinch LM. An analysis of serial models between three and eight years of age. Dent Rec. 1951; 71: 61-72.
18. Nanda RS, Chawla JM. Variability of leeway space. J Indian Dent Assoc. 1973; 45: 99-108.
19. Hixon EH, Oldfather RE. Prediction of lower canine and premolar widths in the mixed dentition. Angle Orthod. 1958; 28: 236-40.
20. Moorrees CFA, Chadha JM. Available space for the incisors during dental development: a growth study based on physiologic age. Angle Orthod. 1965; 35: 12-22.
21. Hotz RP. The role of orthodontics in treatment management of cleft lip and palate. Cleft Palate J. 1970; 7: 371.
22. Hoffding J, Kisling E. Premature loss of primary teeth: Part I. Its overall effect on occlusion and space in the permanent dentition. ASDC J Dent Child. 1978; 45: 279-83.
23. Baume LJ. Physiological tooth migration and its significance for the development of occlusion; the biogenesis of accessional dentition. J Dent Res. 1950; 29: 331-7.
24. Altemus LA. Frequency of the incidence of malocclusion in American Negro children aged twelve to sixteen. Angle Orthod. 1959; 29: 189-200.
25. Lavelle CLB. Maxillary and mandibular tooth size in different racial groups and in different occlusal categories. Am J Orthod. 1972; 61: 29-37.
26. Bailit HL. Dental variation among populations. An anthropologic view. Dent Clin North Am. 1975; 19: 125-39.
27. Bishara SE, Jakobsen JR, Abdallah EM, et al. Comparisons of mesiodistal and buccolingual crown dimensions of the permanent teeth in three populations from Egypt, Mexico, and the United States. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1989; 96: 416-22.
28. Santoro M, Ayoub ME, Pardi VA, et al. Mesiodistal crown dimensions and tooth size discrepancy of the permanent dentition of Dominican Americans. Angle Orthod. 2000; 70: 303-7. doi: 10.1043/0003-3219(2000)070<0303:MCDATS>2.0.CO;2
29. İşcan MY, Kedici PS. Sexual variation in bucco-lingual dimensions in Turkish dentition. Forensic Sci Int. 2003; 137: 160-4. doi: 10.1016/s0379-0738(03)00349-9
30. Arslan SG, Dildeş N, Kama JD, et al. Mixed-dentition analysis in a Turkish population. World J Orthod. 2009; 10: 135-40.
31. Tanaka MM, Johnston LE. The prediction of the size of unerupted canines and premolars in a contemporary orthodontic population. J Am Dent Assoc. 1974; 88: 798-801.
32. Bishara SE, Jakobsen JR. Comparison of two nonradiographic methods of predicting permanent tooth size in the mixed dentition. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1998; 114: 573-6. doi: 10.1016/s0889-5406(98)70019-8
33. Kapoor DN, Chawla TN. A study on mesio-distal crown width of anterior teeth among North Indians. J Indian Dent Assoc. 1973; 45: 241-5.
34. Macko DJ, Ferguson FS, Sonnenberg EM. Mesiodistal crown dimensions of permanent teeth of black Americans. ASDC J Dent Child. 1979; 46: 314-8.
35. Merz ML, Isaacson RJ, Germane N, et al. Tooth diameters and arch perimeters in a black and a white population. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1991; 100: 53-8. doi: 10.1016/0889-5406(91)70049-3
36. Bernabé E, Flores-Mir C. Are the lower incisors the best predictors for the unerupted canine and premolar sums? An analysis of a Peruvian sample. Angle Orthod. 2005; 75: 202-7. doi: 10.1043/0003-3219(2005)075<0198:ATLITB>2.0.CO;2
37. Yuen KK, Tang EL. Relations between the mesiodistal crown diameters of the primary and permanent teeth of Hong Kong Chinese. Arch Oral Biol. 1996; 41: 1-7. doi: 10.1016/0003-9969(95)00107-7
38. Pradhan M, Dhital S, Joshi U, et al. Mean Leeway space in Nepalese children attending a tertiary care hospital, Bhaktapur: a radiographic evaluation. J Kathmandu Med Coll. 2019; 8: 227-30. doi: 10.3126/jkmc.v8i4.32389
39. Sun KT, Wu YZ, Tsai MC, et al. Effects of gender and age in mandibular leeway space for Taiwanese children. Children (Basel). 2021; 8: 999. doi: 10.3390/children8110999
40. Imai H, Sakurai A, Shintani S. Reconsideration of Leeway space calculated using models from same patients at different growth stages. Bull Tokyo Dent Coll. 2023; 63: 167-75. doi: 10.2209/tdcpublication.2021-0046
41. Botero P, Gonzalez Ariza S, Meneses D, et al. Appraisal of the difference between the mesiodistal diameters of deciduous incisors and molars and permanent teeth. Eur J Paediatr Dent. 2015; 16: 39-44.
42. Allen TR, Trojan TM, Harris EF. Evidence favoring a secular reduction in mandibular leeway space. Angle Orthod. 2017; 87: 576-82. doi: 10.2319/091416-688.1