Üst Gömülü Kanin Dişlerin Maksiller Kaide ile İlişkisinin Değerlendirilmesi

Öz

Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı, maksiller gömülü kanin dişlerin maksiller kaide uzunluğu ile olan ilişkilerinin değerlendirilmesidir.

Materyal-metot: Çalışmamıza İstanbul Aydın Üniversitesi Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi Ortodonti Anabilim Dalı'na tedavi için başvuran 142 hasta (67 erkek, 75 kadın; yaş ortalaması 16.34±1.07) üzerinde gerçekleştirilmiştir. Yapılan retrospektif çalışmada; unilateral-bilateral maksiller gömülü kanin dişlerin maksiller kaide uzunluğu ile olan ilişkileri sefalometrik ve panaromik radyografilerde incelenmiştir. p<0.05 için sonuçlar istatistiksel olarak anlamlı kabul edildi.

Bulgular: Cinsiyet ve gömülü kanin dişler arasında istatistiksel olarak anlamlı bir ilişki bulunmadı. Cinsiyetler arasında unilateral gömülü üst kanin dişler daha fazla bulunmuştur. Unilateral gömülü kanin grubunda palatal düzlem değeri istatistiksel olarak daha yüksek bulundu. Palatal düzlem ile gömülü kaninler arasında anlamlı fark bulundu. Maksiller kanin dişlere göre yaş ve efektif orta yüz uzunluğu değişkenleri arasında anlamlı bir fark bulunmadı. Efektif orta yüz uzunluğu ve palatal düzlem değişkenleri arasındaki ilişki incelendiğinde iki değişken arasında pozitif yönlü kuvvetli bir ilişki bulunmuştur ve istatistiksel olarak anlamlıdır. Yaş, efektif orta yüz uzunluğu ve palatal düzlem değişkenlerinin cinsiyete göre karşılaştırılmasında anlamlı bir farklılık bulunmamıştır.

Sonuç: Bu çalışma gömülü kanin dişlerin palatal düzlem ile olan ilişkisini inceleyen ilk spesifik çalışmadır. Bu nedenle kanin dişlerinin konumu, özellikle tedavi planlaması sırasında komşu anatomik yapılar ve dişlerle olan ilişkilerinin değerlendirilmesinde önemli bir yere sahiptir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• gömülü maksiller kanin
• sefalometri
• palatal düzlem

Evaluation of The Relationship of The Upper Impacted Maxillary Canines with Maxillary Base

Öz

Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the relationship between impacted maxillary canine teeth and maxillary base length.
Material-Method: 142 patients (67 males, 75 females; a mean age of 16.34±1.07 years) who were admitted to the Department of Orthodontics of İstanbul Aydın University - Faculty of Dentistry for treatment were included in our study. In the retrospective study, the positions of maxillary canine teeth and their relationship with maxillary base length were examined in detail in cephalometric and panoramic radiographs. Results with p <0.05 were found to be statistically significant.
Results: There was no statistically significant correlation was found between gender and canine impaction. Unilaterally impacted upper canines were found to be higher between genders. Palatal plane value of the unilaterally impacted canine group was found to be statistically greater. Significant difference was found between palatal plane variable and impacted canine. No significant difference was found between age and effective midfacial length variables based on canine. Examination of the correlation between effective midfacial length and palatal plane variables revealed a strong positive correlation, which was statistically significant. There was no significant difference between age, effective midfacial length and palatal plane variables in terms of gender.
Conclusion: This study is the first to specifically address the relationship of impacted canines with the palatal plane. Therefore, the position of the canines has a major place in the evaluation of their relationship with the adjacent anatomical structures and teeth, especially during treatment planning.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• impacted maxillary canine
• cephalometry
• palatal plane

Kaynakça

1. [1] Dachi SF, Howell FV. A survey of 3, 874 routinefull-monthradiographs. II. A study of impacted teeth. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1961; 14: 1165-1169.
2. [2] Shindel RH, Duffy SL, Maxillary transverse discrepansies and potentially impacted maxillary canines in mixed-dentition patients. Angle Orthod. 2007; 77(3): 430-5.
3. [3] Ericson S, Kurol J. Radiographic assessment of maxillary canine eruption in children with clinical signs of eruption disturbance. Eur J Orthod. 1986; 8(3): 133-140.
4. [4] Hou R, Kong L, Ao J, Liu G, Zhou H, Qin R, Hu K. Investigation of impacted permanent teeth except the third molar in Chinese patients through an X-ray study. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2010; 68(4): 762-767.
5. [5] Celikoglu M, Kamak H, Oktay H. Investigation of transmigrated and impacted maxillary and mandibular canine teeth in an orthodontic patient population. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2010; 68(5): 1001-1006.
6. [6] Richardson G, Russell K A. A review of impacted permanent maxillary cuspids-diagnosis and prevention. J Can Dent Assoc. 2000;Oct;66(9):497-501.
7. [7] Yavuz M S, Aras M H, Büyükkurt M C, Tozoglu S. Impacted Mandibular Canines J Contemp Dent Pract 2007;8:78-85.
8. [8] Johnston WD. Treatment of palatally impacted canine teeth. Am J Orthod. 1969; 56(6): 589-596.

9. [9] Ericson S, Kurol J. Early treatment of palatally erupting maxillary canines by extraction of the primary canines. Eur J Orthod. 1988; 10(4): 283-295.
10. [10] Stellzig A, Basdra EK, Komposch G. The etiology of canine tooth impaction a space analysis. Fortschr Kieferorthop. 1994; 55(3): 97-103.
11. [11] Bishara SE. Impacted maxillary canines: a review. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1992; 101(2): 159-171.
12. [12] Jacobs SG. The impacted maxillary canine. Further observations on aetiology, radiographic localization, prevention/interception of impaction, and when to suspect impaction. Aust Dent J. 1996; 41(5): 310-316.
13. [13] Bedoya MM, Park JH. A review of the diagnosis and management of impacted maxillary canines. J Am Dent Assoc. 2009; 140(12): 1485-1493.
14. [14] Litsas G, Acar A. A review of early displaced maxillary canines: etiology, diagnosis and interceptive treatment. Open Dent J. 2011; 16(5): 39-47.
15. [15] Jacoby H. The etiology of maxillary canine impactions. Am J Orthod. 1983; 84(2): 125-132.
16. [16] Lappin MM. Practical management of the impacted maxillary cuspid. Am J Orthod. 1951; 37(10): 769-778.
17. [17] Becker A, Smith P, Behar R. The incidence of anomalous maxillary lateral incisors in relation to palatally-displaced cuspids. Angle Orthod. 1981; 51(1): 24-29.
18. [18] Brin I, Solomon Y, Zilberman Y. Trauma as a possible etiologic factor in maxillary canine impaction. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1993; 104(2): 132-137.
19. [19] Archer WH. Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery oVlume Fifth Edition. W.B. Saunders Company. 250-340 1975.
20. [20] Warford JH Jr, Grandhi RK, Tira DE. Prediction of maxillary canine impaction using sectors and angular measurement. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2003; 124(6): 651-5.
21. [21] Santosh P. Impacted Mandibular Third Molars: Review of Literature and a Proposal of a Combined Clinical and Radiological Classification. Ann Med Health Sci Res.2015;5(4):229-34.
22. [22] Broadbent BH. Ontogenic development of occlusion. Angle Orthod. 1941; 11: 223-241.
23. [23] Coulter J, Richardson A. Normal eruption of the maxillary canine quantified in three dimensions. Eur J Orthod. 1997; 19(2): 171-183.
24. [24] Dalkılıç A. Evaluation of periodontal status of ectopic canines after orthodontic treatment. Marmara University Institute of Health Sciences, Doctorate Thesis, Istanbul, (Ass. Prof. Ahu Acar), 2008; 15-18.
25. [25] Alqerban A, Jacobs R, Fieuws S, Willems G. Radiographic predictors for maxillary canine impaction. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2015; 147(3):345-354.
26. [26] Kim Y, Hyun HK, Jang KT. Morphological relationship analysis of impacted maxillary canines and the adjacent teeth on 3-dimensional reconstructed CT images. Angle Orthod. 2017; 87(4): 590-597.
27. [27] Tadinada A, Mahdian M, Vishwanath M, Allareddy V, Upadhyay M, Yadav S. Evaluation of alveolar bone dimensions in unilateral palatally impacted canine: a cone-beam computed tomographic analyses. Eur J Orthod. 2015; 37(6): 596-602.
28. [28] McBride LJ. Traction a surgical/orthodontic procedure. Am J Orthod. 1979; 76(3): 287-299.
29. [29] Fischer TJ. Orthodontic treatment acceleration with corticotomy-assisted exposure of palatally impacted canines. Angle Orthod. 2007; 77(3): 417-20.
30. [30] Becker A. Etiology of maxillary canine impactions. Am J Orthod. 1984; 86(5):437-438.
31. [31] Brin I, Becker A, Shalhav M. Position of the maxillary permanent canine in relation to anomalous or missing lateral incisors: a population study. Eur J Orthod. 1986; 8(1): 12-16.
32. [32] Dural S, Avcı N, Karabıyıkoğlu T. Gömük dişlerin görülme sıklığı, çenelere göre dağılımları ve gömülü kalma nedenleri. Sağ Bil Arş Derg 1996;7:127-33.
33. [33] Yazıcı S, Kökden A, Tank A. Gömülü Dişler Üzerine Retrospektif Bir Çalışma. Cumhuriyet Üniversitesi Diş Hek Fak Derg 2002;5(2):46-51.
34. [34] Tuğsel Z, Kandemir S, Küçüker F. Üniversite öğrencilerinde üçüncü molarların gömüklülük durumlarının değerlen dirilmesi. Cumhuriyet Üniversitesi Diş Hek Fak Derg 2001;4:102-5.
35. [35] Tantanapornkul W, Okouchi K, Fujiwara Y, et al. A comparative study of cone-beam computed tomography and conventional panoramic radiography in assessing the topographic relationship between the mandibular canal and impacted third molars. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod.2007;103(2):253-9.