Alveolar Bone Thickness around Anterior Teeth in Different Classifications of Malocclusion: A Systematic Review

Nur Masita Silviana

doi:10.18196/di.v11i1.12884

Alveolar Bone Thickness around Anterior Teeth in Different Classifications of Malocclusion: A Systematic Review

Nur Masita Silviana

Abstract

Considering the alveolar bone thickness (ABT) in orthodontic treatment needs special attention. The movement of teeth depends on the mechanism of bone remodeling and tissue response to orthodontic forces to evaluate ABT of the maxillary and mandibular anterior teeth in various types of malocclusion. Methods: Only prospective original articles reporting ABT in subjects who have not undergone orthodontic treatment were selected. A total of 10 studies met the eligible criteria. Most all studies measured the thickness using CBCT. ABT on the labial side of the lower anterior teeth in the class I malocclusion group was thicker than in class II. The lingual side of the apical region of the mandibular incisors was lower in the class III group than in class I or II. ABT of the maxillary teeth on the labial surface showed no significant difference among the groups, whereas the palatal side of normal occlusion had a wider bone thickness. The inclination of the upper and lower anterior teeth was influenced by differences in the skeletal malocclusion pattern, which affected the thickness of the bone. Fenestration was more common in class II malocclusion. The results showed that ABT around anterior teeth varied according to the different classifications of malocclusion. The inclination of the upper and lower anterior teeth seemed to be influenced by the sagittal discrepancies. The pattern of facial growth also affected the thickness of the bone. Accurate evaluation is very important to prevent iatrogenic risks during orthodontic treatment.

Keywords

Alveolar Bone Thickness; Anterior Teeth; Incisors; Classification of The Malocclusion

Full Text:

PDF

References

Steiner GG, Pearson JK, Ainamo J, Miller S, Maria S. Changes of the Marginal Periodontium as a Result of Labial Tooth Movement in Monkeys. J Periodontol, 1981;52:314-320.

DOI:10.1902/JOP.1981.52.6.314

Coşkun İ, Kaya B. Relationship between alveolar bone thickness, tooth root morphology, and sagittal skeletal pattern: A cone-beam computed tomography study. Journal of Orofacial Orthopedics. 2019;80(3):144-158.

DOI:10.1007/s00056-019-00175-9

Horner KA, Behrents RG, Kim KB, Buschang PH. Cortical bone and ridge thickness of hyperdivergent and hypodivergent adults. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics. 2012;142(2): 170-178.

DOI:10.1016/j.ajodo.2012.03.021

Srebrzyńska-Witek A, Koszowski R, Różyło-Kalinowska I. Relationship between anterior mandibular bone thickness and the angulation of incisors and canines—a CBCT study. Clinical Oral Investigations.2018;22(3):1567-1578. DOI:10.1007/s00784-017-2255-3

Gaffuri F, Cossellu G, Maspero C, et al. Correlation between facial growth patterns and cortical bone thickness assessed with cone-beam computed tomography in young adult untreated patients. Saudi Dental Journal. 2021;33(3):161-167. DOI:10.1016/j.sdentj.2020.01.009

Al-Masri MM, Ajaj MA, Hajeer MY, Al-Eed MS. Evaluation of Bone Thickness and Density in the Lower Incisors’ region in Adults with Different Types of Skeletal Malocclusion using Cone-beam Computed Tomography. Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice. 2015; 16(8):630-637.

DOI:10.5005/jp-journals-10024-1733

Raber A, Kula K, Ghoneima A. Three-dimensional evaluation of labial alveolar bone overlying the maxillary and mandibular incisors in different skeletal classifications of malocclusion. International Orthodontics. 2019; 17(2):287-295.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ortho.2019.03.011

Wang Z, Ma Z, Yang C. Alveolar bone loss around mandibular anterior teeth in Class I, II, and III malocclusions: a CBCT evaluation study. Published online 2020. DOI:10.21203/rs.3.rs-34913/v1

Baysal A, Ucar FI, Buyuk SK, Ozer T, Uysal T. Alveolar bone thickness and lower incisor position in skeletal class I and class II malocclusions assessed with cone-beam computed tomography. Korean Journal of Orthodontics. 2013;43(3):134-140. DOI:10.4041/kjod.2013.43.3.134

Andrews WA, Abdulrazzaq WS, Hunt JE, Mendes LM, Hallman LA. Incisor position and alveolar bone thickness. The Angle Orthodontist.2022;92(1):3-10.

DOI:10.2319/022320-122.1

Kook YA, Kim G, Kim Y. Comparison of alveolar bone loss around incisors in normal occlusion samples and surgical skeletal Class III patients. Angle Orthodontist. 2012;82(4):645-652.

DOI:10.2319/070111-424.1

Ma J, Huang J, Jiang J hui. Morphological analysis of the alveolar bone of the anterior teeth in severe high-angle skeletal Class II and Class III malocclusions assessed with cone-beam computed tomography. PLoS ONE.2019;14(3). DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0210461

Nahm KY, Kang JH, Moon SC, et al. Alveolar bone loss around incisors in Class I bidentoalveolar protrusion patients: A retrospective three-dimensional cone-beam CT study. Dentomaxillofacial Radiology. 2012; 41(6):481-488. DOI:10.1259/dmfr/30845402

Oh SH, Nahm KY, Kim SH, Nelson G. Alveolar bone thickness and fenestration of incisors in untreated Korean patients with skeletal class III malocclusion: A retrospective 3-dimensional cone-beam computed tomography study. Imaging Science in Dentistry.2020;50(1):9-14. DOI:10.5624/isd.2020.50.1.9

Tian Y Lou, Liu F, Sun HJ, et al. Alveolar bone thickness around maxillary central incisors of different inclination assessed with cone-beam computed tomography. Korean Journal of Orthodontics. 2015;45(5):245-252. DOI:10.4041/kjod.2015.45.5.245

Evangelista K, Vasconcelos KDF, Bumann A, Hirsch E, Nitka M, Silva MAG. Dehiscence and fenestration in patients with class I and class II division 1 malocclusion assessed with cone-beam computed tomography. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics. 2010;138(2): 133.e1-133.e7. DOI:10.1016/j.ajodo.2010.02.021

Enhos S, Uysal T, Yagci A, Velid I, Ucare FI, Ozerf T. Dehiscence and fenestration in patients with different vertical growth patterns assessed with cone-beam computed tomography. Angle Orthodontist. 2012;82(5):868-874.

DOI:10.2319/111211-702.1

Yagci A, Veli I, Uysal T, Ucar FI, Ozer T, Enhos S. Dehiscence and fenestration in skeletal Class I, II, and III malocclusions assessed with cone-beam computed tomography. Angle Orthodontist. 2012;82(1):67-74.

DOI:10.2319/040811-250.1

Kajan ZD, Monir SES, Khosravifard N, Jahri D. Fenestration and Dehiscence in the Alveolar Bone of Anterior Maxillary and Mandibular Teeth in Cone-Beam Computed Tomography of an Iranian Population. Dental Research Journal. 2020;17(5):380-387. Vol 380.; 2020.

Klinge A, Becktor K, Lindh C, Becktor JP. Craniofacial height in relation to cross-sectional maxillary and mandibular morphology. Progress in Orthodontics. 2017;18(1): 32.

DOI:10.1186/s40510-017-0187-8

Sadek MM, Sabet NE, Hassan IT. Alveolar bone mapping in subjects with different vertical facial dimensions. Eur J Orthod. 2014;37(2):194–201

DOI:10.1093/ejo/cju034

Fiorellini JP, Kim DM, Uzel NG. Anatomy of the periodontium. In: Newman MG, Takei H, Klokkevold PR, editors. Carranza’s Clinical Periodontology. 11th ed. St. Louis, MO: Saunders Elsevier. 2015; pp.11,31‑7.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.18196/di.v11i1.12884