Üçüncü Molar Dişlerde Dental Anomali Görülme Prevelansının Konik Işınlı Bilgisayarlı Tomografi Kullanılarak İncelenmesi

Year 2025, Volume: 5 Issue: 1, 24 - 29, 29.04.2025

Elif Çeçen Erol , Merve Küçük , Zarif Ece Hammudioğlu , Ceren Aktuna Belgin

https://doi.org/10.61139/ijdor.1592585

Abstract

Background: Dental anomalies are one of the problems frequently encountered during dental examinations. The aim of this study is to evaluate the frequency of dental anomalies such as transposition, ectopia, microdontia, taurodontism, dilaceration, paramolar teeth, amelogenesis imperfecta and inversion in sex and third molars.
Materials and Methods: Cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) images of 2300 patients aged between 12 and 65 years who applied to Hatay Mustafa Kemal University Faculty of Dentistry for various reasons between January 2021 and June 2024 were retrospectively evaluated. While scanning the CBCTs, the sex of the patients and the tooth in which the anomaly was present were noted. All scans were performed by three observers reaching a consensus. Descriptive statistics method was used for statistical analysis.
Results:It was observed that the rate of anomalies in all third molars was 10.8%. It was calculated that 54.8% of the individuals with these anomalies were female, 45.2% were male, and the average age was 29.8. It was observed that the most common anomaly in tooth number 18 was ectopia with a rate of 57.14%, the most common anomaly in tooth number 28 was microdontia with a rate of 36.76%, the most common anomaly in tooth number 38 was dilaceration with a rate of 43.9%, and the most common anomaly in tooth number 48 was dilaceration with a rate of 37.72%. It was determined that the most common dental anomaly in women was dilaceration with a rate of 42% and in men was dilaceration with a rate of 57%. Of the anomalies detected, 0.4% were transposition, 11.3% were ectopia, 13.8% were microdontia, 9.3% were taurodontism, 55.48% were dilaceration, 5.89% were paramolar, 2.43% were amelogenesis imperfecta, and 1.2% were inversion.
Conclusion: Dilaceration was found to be the most common dental anomaly, most commonly seen in males and in tooth number 38. After dilaceration, microdontia and ectopia are other common anomalies. It was concluded that microdontia and ectopia were most common in females and in tooth number 18.

Keywords

Dental anomaly , dilaceration , microdontia , taurodontism , cone beam computed tomography

Investigation of the Prevalence of Dental Anomalies in Third Molars Using Cone Beam Computed Tomography

Abstract

Amaç: Dental anomaliler diş muayeneleri esnasında sıkça karşılaşılan problemlerden biridir. Bu çalışmanın amacı dental anomalilerden; transpozisyon, ektopi, mikrodonti, taurodontizm, dilaserasyon, paramolar diş, amelogenesiz imperfekta ve enversiyonun cinsiyet ve 20 yaş dişlerinde görülme sıklığının araştırılmasıdır.
Materyal-Metod: Ocak 2021- Haziran 2024 tarihleri arasında Hatay Mustafa Kemal Üniversitesi Diş Hekimliği Fakültesine çeşitli nedenlerle başvurmuş olan yaşları 12 ile 65 yaş arasında değişen 2300 Konik ışınlı bilgisayarlı tomografileri (KIBT) retrospektif olarak incelenmiştir. KIBT’ler taranırken, hastaların cinsiyeti ve hangi dişte anomali olduğu not edilmiştir. Tüm taramaları üç gözlemci fikir birliğine vararak gerçekleştirmiştir. İstatiksel analiz için tanımlayıcı istatistik yöntemi kullanılmıştır.
Bulgular: 20 yaş dişlerinde anomali görülme oranının %10,8 olduğu, bu anomalilere sahip kişilerin %54,8’nin kadın %45,2’sinin erkek olduğu, yaş ortalamasının 29,8 olduğu sonucu elde edilmiştir. 18 numaralı dişte en sık görülen anomalinin%57,14 oranında ektopi, 28 nolu dişte %36,76 oranında en sık görülen anomalinin mikrodonti, 38 numaralı dişte en sık görülen anomalinin %43,9 oranında dileserasyon ve 48 numaralı dişlerde en sık görülen anomalinin ise %37,72 oranında dilaserasyon olduğu görülmüştür. Kadınlarda %42 oranında erkeklerde ise %57 oranında en sık görülen dental anomalinin dilaserasyon olduğu tespit edilmiştir. Tespit edilen anomalilerin %0,4’ü transpozisyon, %11,3’ü ektopi, %13,8’i mikrodonti, %9,3’ü taurodontizm, %55,48’i dilaserasyon, %5,89’u paramolar, %2,43’ü amelogenesiz imperfecta, %1,2’si enversiyon olduğu bulunmuştur.
Sonuç: Dilaserasyonun en çok görülen dental anomali olduğu, en çok erkeklerde ve 38 numaralı dişte görüldüğü tespit edilmiştir. Dilaserasyondan sonra mikrodonti ve ektopi de diğer sık görülen anomalilerdendir. Mikrodonti ve ektopi ise en çok kadınlarda ve 18 numaralı dişte görüldüğü sonucuna ulaşılmıştır.

Keywords

Dental anomali , dileserasyon , mikrodonti , taurodontizm , Konik ışınlı bilgisayarlı tomografi

References

• 1. Neville BW, Damm DD, Allen CM, Bouquot JE. Oral & Maxillofacial Pathology. 2nd ed W.B. Saunders Company, 2002:49-106.
• 2. Sezgin ÖS, Kayıpmaz S. Diş Hekimliğinde Radyolojinin Esasları Konvansiyonelden Dijitale. 1 ed İstanbul Medikal Sağlık ve Yayıncılık İstanbul, 2017:937-971.
• 3. Harorlı A, Akgül HM, Yılmaz AB, Bilge OM, Dağistan S, Çakur B, Çağlayan F, Miloğlu Ö, Sümbüllü MA. Ağız Diş ve Çene Radyolojisi Nobel, İstanbul, 2014
• 4. Uzun İ, Kalyoncuoğlu E, Demiral M, Güler B, Gündüz K. Ondokuz Mayıs üniversitesi Diş Hekimliği Fakültesine Başvuran Yetişkin Popülasyonda Dilaserasyon Prevalansının Retrospektif Olarak Değerlendirilmesi. Ondokuz Mayıs Üniversitesi Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi Dergisi 2013;14(1)21-5
• 5. Mossaz J, Kloukos D, Pandis N, Suter VG, Katsaros C, Bornstein MM. Morphologic characteristics, location, and associated complications of maxillary and mandibular supernumerary teeth as evaluated using cone beam computed tomography. Eur J Orthod 2014;36(6):708-18.
• 6. Shapira Y, Kuftinec MM. Maxillary tooth transpositions: characteristic features and accompanying dental anomalies. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2001;119(2):127-34.
• 7. Tay F, Pang A, Yuen S. Unerupted maxillary anterior supernumerary teeth: report of 204 cases. ASDC J Dent Child 1984;51(4):289-94.
• 8. Bjerklin K, Kurol J, Paulin G. Ectopic eruption of the maxillary first permanent molars in children with cleft lip and/or palate. Eur J Orthod 1993;15(6):535-40.
• 9. Kazmi S, Mânica S, Revie G, Shepherd S, Hector M. Age estimation using canine pulp volumes in adults: a CBCT image analysis. Int J Legal Med 2019;133(6):1967-1976.
• 10. Asheghi B, Sahebi S, Rafiee Z, Zangooei Booshehri M, Habibi A. A cone-beam computed tomography-based evaluation of root dilaceration in permanent premolars: A retrospective study. J Dent (Shiraz) 2024;25(2):155-161.
• 11. Kvaratsthelia S. Prevalence of dentition, dental arches and dental anomalies. Georgian Med News 2024;(347):177-180.
• 12. Çakıcı F, Benkli Y, Çakıcı E. The prevalence of taurodontism in a north Anatolian dental patient subpopulation. Mid Blac Sea J Health Sci 2015;1(1):7-10.
• 13. Kuzin AV, Vedyaeva AP, Rusanov FS, Sogachyova VV, Remizov GV, Potapova AI. Anomalii stroeniya kornei tret'ikh molyarov, tesno prilegayushchikh k nizhnechelyustnomu kanalu, kak predraspolagayushchii faktor travmy nizhnego al'veolyarnogo nerva [Impacted third molar root abnormality with mandibular canal close position as a presupposing factor to inferior alveolar nerve trauma]. Stomatologiia (Mosk) 2024;103(4):75-80.
• 14. Niedzielska I. Third molar influence on dental arch crowding. Eur J Orthod 2005;27(5):518-3.
• 15. Kharkar AP, Reddy KS, Banerjee S, Maheshwari Z. Coping with complexity: Navigating severe curve canals in endodontic root canal treatment: A clinical case series. J Conserv Dent Endod 2024;27(7):785-8.
• 16. Lambade P, Lambade D, Dolas RS, Virani N. Ectopic mandibular third molar leading to osteomyelitis of condyle: a case report with literature review. Oral Maxillofac Surg 2013;17(2):127-30.
• 17. ALHumaid J, Buholayka M, Thapasum A, Alhareky M, Abdelsalam M, Bughsan A. Investigating prevalence of dental anomalies in Eastern Province of Saudi Arabia through digital orthopantomogram. Saudi J Biol Sci 2021;28(5):2900-6.
• 18. Chen Y, Bei M, Woo I, Satokata I, Maas R. Msx1 controls inductive signaling in mammalian tooth morphogenesis. Development 1996;122(10):3035-44.
• 19. Gupta SK, Saxena P, Jain S, Jain D. Prevalence and distribution of selected developmental dental anomalies in an Indian population. J Oral Sci 2011;53(2):231-8.
• 20. Dalili Z, Nemati S, Dolatabadi N, Javadzadeh A S, Mohtavipoor S T. Prevalence of Developmental and Acquired Dental Anomalies on Digital panoramic Radiography in Patients Attending the Dental Faculty of Rasht, Iran. Journal of Dentomaxiillofacial Radiology, Patholohy and Surgery 2012;1(2):24-32.
• 21. Wagner VP, Arrué T, Hilgert E, Arús NA, da Silveira HLD, Martins MD, Rodrigues JA. Prevalence and distribution of dental anomalies in a paediatric population based on panoramic radiographs analysis. Eur J Paediatr Dent 2020;21(4):292-8.
• 22. Goncalves-Filho AJ, Moda LB, Oliveira RP, Ribeiro AL, Pinheiro JJ, Alver-Junior SR. Prevalence of dental anomalies on panoramic radiographs in a population of the state of Pará, Brazil. Indian J Dent Res 2014 ;25(5):648-52.
• 23. Miloglu O, Cakici F, Caglayan F, Yilmaz AB, Demirkaya F. The prevalence of root dilacerations in a Turkish population. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal 2010;15(3):e441-4.
• 24. Hamasha AA, Al-Khateeb T, Darwazeh A. Prevalence of dilaceration in Jordanian adults. Int Endod J 2002;35(11):910-2.
• 25. Gupta SK, Saxena P, Jain S, Jain D. Prevalence and distribution of selected developmental dental anomalies in an Indian population. J Oral Sci 2011;53(2):231-8.
• 26. Bilge NH, Yeşiltepe S, Törenek Ağırman K, Çağlayan F, Bilge OM. Investigation of prevalence of dental anomalies by using digital panoramic radiographs. Folia Morphol (Warsz) 2018;77(2):323-8.
• 27. Papadopoulos MA, Chatzoudi M, Kaklamanos EG. Prevalence of tooth transposition. A meta-analysis. Angle Orthod 2010;80(2):275-85.
• 28. Fekonja A. Prevalence of dental developmental anomalies of permanent teeth in children and their influence on esthetics. J Esthet Restor Dent 2017;29(4):276-83.
• 29. Avsever H, Gunduz K, Orhan K, Aksoy S. An Inverted Eruption of Mesiodens: Report of a Rare Case. Journal of Marmara University Institute of Health Sciences 2012;2(1):37-9.
• 30. Seddon RP, Johnstone SC, Smith PB. Mesiodentes in twins: a case report and a review of the literature. Int J Paediatr Dent 1997;7(3):177-84.
• 31. Neville, Brad W, Douglas, Damm D, Allen CM, Chi AC. Oral and Maxillofacial Pathology. 4th ed. Elsevier, 2016.
• 32. Süsgün Yıldırım Z, Evlice B, Sonkaya E, Duyan H. Çukurova Popülasyonunda Gelişimsel Diş Anomalisi Görülme Sıklığı: Radyografik Bir Çalışma. Selcuk Dent J 2023;10(2):434-9.
• 33. Martínez-González JM, Cortés-Bretón Brinkmann J, Calvo-Guirado JL, Arias Irimia O, Barona-Dorado C. Clinical epidemiological analysis of 173 supernumerary molars. Acta Odontol Scand 2012;70(5):398-404.
• 34. Gadhia K, McDonald S, Arkutu N, Malik K. Amelogenesis imperfecta: an introduction. Br Dent J 2012;212(8):377-9.
• 35. Saberi EA, Ebrahimipour S. Evaluation of developmental dental anomalies in digital panoramic radiographs in Southeast Iranian Population. J Int Soc Prev Community Dent 2016;6(4):291-5.
• 36. Renugalakshmi A, Vinothkumar TS, Bokhari AM, Almahdi S, Almalki A, Balla SB, Tadakamadla SK, Hakami Z. Prevalence of Dental Anomalies and Its Role in Sex Estimation among Children of Jazan Region, Saudi Arabia. Children (Basel) 2023;10(4):759.
• 37. Sella Tunis T, Sarne O, Hershkovitz I, Finkelstein T, Pavlidi AM, Shapira Y, Davidovitch M, Shpack N. Dental Anomalies' Characteristics. Diagnostics (Basel) 2021;11(7):1161.