Fenestration and Dehiscence Types in Turkish Subpopulation Skulls

Yıl 2024, Cilt: 34 Sayı: 1, 2 - 8, 18.01.2024

Ahmet Mert Nalbantoğlu Deniz Yanık Soner Albay

https://doi.org/10.5152/CRDS.2022.22132

Öz

ABSTRACT
Objective: The objective of the study is to evaluate the fenestration and dehiscence types in Turkish human skulls according to 2 classifications.
Methods: For the study, 297 skulls with 1808 teeth were analyzed from a collection of anat- omy laboratories of 2 universities. Yang’s and Pan’s classifications were used to determine fenestration and dehiscence types. Chi-square and Fisher’s exact tests were used for statisti- cal analysis.
Results: There was no statistical difference in the presence of fenestration and dehiscence between the maxilla and mandible (P > .05). Type IV was most common fenestration in the maxilla (P = .029). Types III and IV were the most common types in the mandible (P < .05). CI DI and CI DII were the most common dehiscence in the maxilla and mandible, respec- tively (P < .05). The maxillary first premolar showed the highest prevalence of fenestration (P < .001). The mesial root of the maxillary first molar showed the highest prevalence of dehiscence (P < .05).
Conclusion: The prevalence of fenestration and dehiscence was 8.70% and 10.06%, respectively, in Turkish human skulls. Fenestration in maxilla were mostly located in middle and apical of the root (type IV), the ones in mandible were in the coronal third of the root (type III). The most affected tooth was the maxillary first premolar for fenestration and the maxillary first molar for dehiscence. Most dehiscences in the maxilla were located in the coronal (CI DI), and they were located in both the coronal and middle thirds (CI DII) in the mandible.
Keywords: Alveolar bone, dehiscence, dry skull, endodontics, fenestration, mucogingival surgery
ÖZ
Amaç: Çalışmanın amacı Türk insan kuru kafataslarındaki dehisens ve fenestrasyon tiplerini iki sınıflamaya göre değerlendirmektir.
Yöntemler: Çalışma için iki üniversitenin anatomi laboratuvarlarının koleksiyonundan 1808 dişe sahip 297 kafatası analiz edildi. Fenestrasyon ve açılma tiplerinin belirlenmesinde Yang ve Pan’ın sınıflandırmaları kullanıldı. İstatistiksel analizde ki-kare ve Fisher exact testleri kullanıldı.
Bulgular: Maksilla ve mandibula arasında fenestrasyon ve dehisens varlığı açısından istatistiksel fark bulunamadı (P>.05). Maksillada en sık görülen fenestrasyon Tip IV idi (P=.029). Alt çenede en sık görülen tip III ve IV tipi idi (P<.05). CI DI ve CI DII sırasıyla maksilla ve mandibulada en sık görü- len dehisens tipleriydi (P<.05). Üst birinci küçük azı dişi en yüksek fenestrasyon prevalansını gös- terdi (P<.001). En yüksek dehisens prevalansı ise maksiller birinci moların mezial kökünde görüldü (P<.05).
Sonuç: Türk insan kafataslarında fenestrasyon ve dehisens prevalansı sırasıyla %8.70 ve %10.06 idi. Maksilladaki fenestrasyonların çoğu kökün hem orta hem de apikal üçlüsünde konumlanan tip IV sınıfına aitti. Mandibuladaki fenestrasyonlar ise koronal üçlüde (tip III) yerleşmişti. En çok etkilenen diş grupları; fenestrasyon için üst birinci premolar, ve dehisens için üst birinci molardı. Maksilladaki dehisensin çoğu koronal bölgede (CI DI) konumlanırken, mandibuladakileri çoğu ise hem koronal hem de orta üçlüyü içeren CI DII sınıfına aitti.
Anahtar Kelimeler: Alveolar kemik, dehisens, kuru kafatası, endodonti, fenestrasyon, mukogingi- val cerrahi

Anahtar Kelimeler

Alveolar bone, dehiscence, dry skull, endodontics, fenestration

Kaynakça

• 1. Ho SP, Marshall SJ, Ryder MI, Marshall GW. The tooth attachment mechanism defined by structure, chemical composition and mechanical properties of collagen fibers in the periodontium. Bio- materials. 2007;28(35):5238-5245. [CrossRef]
• 2. Hansson S, Halldin A. Alveolar ridge resorption after tooth extraction: a consequence of a fundamental principle of bone physiology. J Dent Biomech. 2012;3:1758736012456543. [CrossRef]
• 3. Abdelmalek RG, Bissada NF. Incidence and distribution of alveolar bony dehiscence and fenestration in dry human Egyption jaws. J Periodontol. 1973;44(9):586-588. [CrossRef]
• 4. Pan HY, Yang H, Zhang R, et al. Use of cone-beam computed tomog- raphy to evaluate the prevalence of root fenestration in a Chinese subpopulation. Int Endod J. 2014;47(1):10-19. [CrossRef]
• 5. American Association of Endodontists. Glossary of Endodontic Terms. Cited 10 September 2020; updated March 2020.
• 6. Nimigean VR, Nimigean V, Bencze MA, Dimcevici-Poesina N, Cer- gan R, Moraru S. Alveolar bone dehiscences and fenestrations: an anatomical study and review. Rom J Morphol Embryol. 2009;50(3):391-397.
• 7. Larato DC. Alveolar plate fenestrations and dehiscences of the human skull. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1970;29(6):816-819. [CrossRef]
• 8. Davies RM, Downer MC, Hull PS, Lennon MA. Alveolar defects in human skulls. J Clin Periodontol. 1974;1(2):107-111. [CrossRef]
• 9. Volchansky A, Vieira E. Alveolar dehiscence and fenestration in dried South Africa Negro maxillae. J Dent Assoc S Afr. 1981;36(10):701-704.
• 10. Jorgić-Srdjak K, Plancak D, Bosnjak A, Azinović Z. Incidence and dis- tribution of dehiscences and fenestrations on human skulls. Coll Antropol. 1998;22(suppl):111-116.
• 11. Grimoud AM, Gibbon VE, Ribot I. Predictive factors for alveolar fen- estration and dehiscence. Homo. 2017;68(3):167-175. [CrossRef]
• 12. Elliott JR, Bowers GM. Alveolar dehiscences and Fenestration. Peri- odontics. 1963;1:6.
• 13. Edel A. Alveolar bone fenestrations and dehiscences in dry Bedouin jaws. J Clin Periodontol. 1981;8(6):491-499. [CrossRef]
• 14. Rupprecht RD, Horning GM, Nicoll BK, Cohen ME. Prevalence of dehiscences and fenestrations in modern American skulls. J Perio- dontol. 2001;72(6):722-729. [CrossRef]
• 15. Yang Y, Yang H, Pan H, Xu J, Hu T. Evaluation and new classification of alveolar bone dehiscences using cone-beam computed tomogra- phy in vivo. Int J Morphol. 2015;33(1):361-368. [CrossRef]
• 16. Yagci A, Veli I, Uysal T, Ucar FI, Ozer T, Enhos S. Dehiscence and fen- estration in skeletal Class I, II, and III malocclusions assessed with cone-beam computed tomography. Angle Orthod. 2012;82(1):67-74. [CrossRef]
• 17. Kalaitzoglou ME, Angelopoulos C, Lyroudia K, Lambrianidis T. Fre- quency of root fenestration in a Greek subpopulation: a cone beam computed tomography clinical study. Aust Endod J. 2021;47(3):580-591. [CrossRef]
• 18. Tian YL, Liu F, Sun HJ, et al. Alveolar bone thickness around maxillary central incisors of different inclination assessed with cone-beam computed tomography. Korean J Orthod. 2015;45(5):245-252. [CrossRef]
• 19. Nalbantoğlu AM, Yanık D. Evaluation of facial alveolar bone thickness and fenestration of the maxillary premolars. Arch Oral Biol. 2022;142:105522. [CrossRef]
• 20. Tal H. Alveolar dehiscences and fenestrae in dried South African Negro mandibles. Am J Phys Anthropol. 1983;61(2):173-179. [CrossRef]
• 21. Yoshioka T, Kikuchi I, Adorno CG, Suda H. Periapical bone defects of root filled teeth with persistent lesions evaluated by cone- beam computed tomography. Int Endod J. 2011;44(3):245-252. [CrossRef]
• 22. Ezawa T, Sano H, Kaneko K, Hiruma S, Fujikawa K, Murai S. The cor- relation between the presence of dehiscence or fenestration and the severity of tooth attrition in contemporary dry Japanese adult skulls- Part I. J Nihon Univ Sch Dent. 1987;29(1):27-34. [CrossRef]
• 23. Volchansky A, Cleaton-Jones P. Bony defects in dried Bantu mandi- bles. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1978;45(4):647-653. [CrossRef]
• 24. Alsino HI, Hajeer MY, Alkhouri I, Murad RMT. The diagnostic accuracy of cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) imaging in detecting and measuring dehiscence and fenestration in patients with Class I malocclusion: a surgical-exposure-based validation study. Cureus. 2022;14(3):e22789. [CrossRef]
• 25. Leung CC, Palomo L, Griffith R, Hans MG. Accuracy and reliability of cone-beam computed tomography for measuring alveolar bone height and detecting bony dehiscences and fenestrations. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2010;137(4)(suppl):S109-S119. [CrossRef]
• 26. Patcas R, Müller L, Ullrich O, Peltomäki T. Accuracy of cone-beam computed tomography at different resolutions assessed on the bony covering of the mandibular anterior teeth. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2012;141(1):41-50. [CrossRef]