Top

Journal of Orofacial Orthopedics / Fortschritte der Kieferorthopädie

Published in:

05-07-2022 | Digital Volume Tomography | Original article

Evaluation´ of mandibular alveolar bone in patients with different vertical facial patterns

A cross-sectional CBCT study

Authors: Assistant Prof. Sibel Akbulut, Associate Prof. Dr. Seval Bayrak

Published in: Journal of Orofacial Orthopedics / Fortschritte der Kieferorthopädie | Issue 2/2024

Abstract

Purpose

The study aimed to investigate the morphological and structural differences of mandibular alveolar bone between different vertical facial patterns (VFP).

Methods

In all, 66 CBCT scans of patients were selected for the study: 24 were designated as hyperdivergent, 25 as normodivergent, and 17 as hypodivergent. Fractal values of the interdental alveolus were measured at the incisor, canine, premolar, and molar regions. The minimum trabecular bone width (MTBW) of the alveolus, the buccal and lingual cortical bone thicknesses, and the total alveolar width (AW) at the minimum trabecular bone level were measured. One-way analysis of variance and Tukey test were used to compare the groups. The correlations between FMA (Frankfurt mandibular plane angle) and other measurements were analyzed by Pearson analysis.

Results

No significant differences were detected in fractal values and buccal and lingual cortical bone thicknesses between the groups. The MTBW and AW of the hypodivergent individuals were found to be higher in the anterior and premolar interdental sites. FMA was found to be significantly correlated with MTBW and AW.

Conclusions

The patients with different VFPs did not exhibit significant differences in the trabecular complexity of the mandibular alveolus. Hypodivergent patients tend to have thicker trabecular and alveolar bone widths than normodivergent and hyperdivergent individuals.

Lombardo G, Vena F, Negri P, Pagano S, Barilotti C, Paglia L et al (2020) Worldwide prevalence of malocclusion in the different stages of dentition: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Paediatr Dent 21:115–122. https://doi.org/10.23804/ejpd.2020.21.02.05CrossRefPubMed

Marques LS, Ramos-Jorge ML, Rey AC, Armond MC, Ruellas AC (2010) Severe root resorption in orthodontic patients treated with the edgewise method: prevalence and predictive factors. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 137:384–388. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2008.04.024CrossRefPubMed

Chugh T, Jain AK, Jaiswal RK, Mehrotra P, Mehrotra R (2013) Bone density and its importance in orthodontics. J Oral Biol Craniofac Res 3:92–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobcr.2013.01.001CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Midgett RJ, Shaye R, Fruge JF Jr. (1981) The effect of altered bone metabolism on orthodontic tooth movement. Am J Orthod 80:256–262. https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9416(81)90289-xCrossRefPubMed

Southard TE, Southard KA, Lee A (2001) Alveolar process fractal dimension and postcranial bone density. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 91:486–491. https://doi.org/10.1067/moe.2001.112598CrossRefPubMed

Hua Y, Nackaerts O, Duyck J, Maes F, Jacobs R (2009) Bone quality assessment based on cone beam computed tomography imaging. Clin Oral Implants Res 20:767–771. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2008.01677.xCrossRefPubMed

Lee D‑H, Ku Y, Rhyu I‑C, Hong J‑U, Lee C‑W, Heo M‑S et al (2010) A clinical study of alveolar bone quality using the fractal dimension and the implant stability quotient. J Periodontal Implant Sci 40:19–24. https://doi.org/10.5051/jpis.2010.40.1.19CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Ghafari JG, Ammoury MJ (2020) Overcoming compact bone resistance to tooth movement. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 158:343–348. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2020.02.006CrossRefPubMed

Weltman B, Vig KW, Fields HW, Shanker S, Kaizar EE (2010) Root resorption associated with orthodontic tooth movement: a systematic review. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 137:462–476. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2009.06.021CrossRefPubMed

10.

Ramos AL, Dos SMC, de Almeida MR, Mir CF (2020) Bone dehiscence formation during orthodontic tooth movement through atrophic alveolar ridges. Angle Orthod 90:321–329. https://doi.org/10.2319/063019-443.1CrossRefPubMed

11.

Antoun JS, Mei L, Gibbs K, Farella M (2017) Effect of orthodontic treatment on the periodontal tissues. Periodontol 2000 74:140–157. https://doi.org/10.1111/prd.12194CrossRefPubMed

12.

Jager F, Mah JK, Bumann A (2017) Peridental bone changes after orthodontic tooth movement with fixed appliances: a cone-beam computed tomographic study. Angle Orthod 87:672–680. https://doi.org/10.2319/102716-774.77CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

13.

Gomes SG, Custodio W, Faot F, Del Bel Cury AA, Garcia RC (2010) Masticatory features, EMG activity and muscle effort of subjects with different facial patterns. J Oral Rehabil 37:813–819. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2842.2010.02075.xCrossRefPubMed

14.

Gomes SG, Custodio W, Jufer JS, Del Bel CA, Garcia RC (2010) Mastication, EMG activity and occlusal contact area in subjects with different facial types. Cranio 28:274–279. https://doi.org/10.1179/crn.2010.035CrossRefPubMed

15.

Boyle C, Kim IY (2011) Three-dimensional micro-level computational study of Wolff’s law via trabecular bone remodeling in the human proximal femur using design space topology optimization. J Biomech 44:935–942. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbiomech.2010.11.029CrossRefPubMed

16.

Chen JH, Liu C, You L, Simmons CA (2010) Boning up on Wolff’s Law: mechanical regulation of the cells that make and maintain bone. J Biomech 43:108–118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbiomech.2009.09.016CrossRefPubMed

17.

Akbulut S, Bayrak S, Korkmaz YN (2020) Prediction of rapid palatal expansion success via fractal analysis in hand-wrist radiographs. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 158:192–198. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2019.07.018CrossRefPubMed

18.

Swasty D, Lee JS, Huang JC, Maki K, Gansky SA, Hatcher D et al (2009) Anthropometric analysis of the human mandibular cortical bone as assessed by cone-beam computed tomography. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 67:491–500. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2008.06.089CrossRefPubMed

19.

Tweed CH (1969) The diagnostic facial triangle in the control of treatment objectives. Am J Orthod 55:651–657. https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9416(69)90041-4CrossRefPubMed

20.

Horner KA, Behrents RG, Kim KB, Buschang PH (2012) Cortical bone and ridge thickness of hyperdivergent and hypodivergent adults. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 142:170–178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2012.03.021CrossRefPubMed

21.

White SC, Rudolph DJ (1999) Alterations of the trabecular pattern of the jaws in patients with osteoporosis. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 88:628–635. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1079-2104(99)70097-1CrossRefPubMed

22.

Sanchez I, Uzcategui G (2011) Fractals in dentistry. J Dent 39:273–292. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2011.01.010CrossRefPubMed

23.

Bollen AM, Taguchi A, Hujoel PP, Hollender LG (2001) Fractal dimension on dental radiographs. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 30:270–275. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj/dmfr/4600630CrossRefPubMed

24.

Fazzalari NL, Parkinson IH (1996) Fractal dimension and architecture of trabecular bone. J Pathol 178:100–105. https://doi.org/10.1002/(sici)1096-9896(199601)178CrossRefPubMed

25.

Yoo S, Yin FF (2006) Dosimetric feasibility of cone-beam CT-based treatment planning compared to CT-based treatment planning. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 66:1553–1561. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2006.08.031CrossRefPubMed

26.

Majumdar S, Genant HK, Grampp S, Newitt DC, Truong VH, Lin JC et al (1997) Correlation of trabecular bone structure with age, bone mineral density, and osteoporotic status: in vivo studies in the distal radius using high resolution magnetic resonance imaging. J Bone Miner Res 12:111–118. https://doi.org/10.1359/jbmr.1997.12.1.111CrossRefPubMed

27.

Li L, Wang Z (2018) Ovarian aging and osteoporosis. In: Wang Z (ed) Aging and Aging-Related Diseases,1st edn. Springer, Singapore 199–215

28.

Wishart JM, Need AG, Horowitz M, Morris HA, Nordin BE (1995) Effect of age on bone density and bone turnover in men. Clin Endocrinol 42:141–146. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2265.1995.tb01854.xCrossRef

29.

Puntus T, Schneider B, Meran J, Peterlik M, Kudlacek S (2011) Influence of age and gender on associations of body mass index with bone mineral density, bone turnover markers and circulating calcium-regulating and bone-active sex hormones. Bone 49:824–829. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bone.2011.06.003CrossRefPubMed

30.

Li H, Zhang H, Smales RJ, Zhang Y, Ni Y, Ma J et al (2014) Effect of 3 vertical facial patterns on alveolar bone quality at selected miniscrew implant sites. Implant Dent 23:92–97. https://doi.org/10.1097/ID.0000000000000036CrossRefPubMed

31.

Ding WH, Li W, Chen F, Zhang JF, Lv Y, Chen XY et al (2015) Comparison of molar intrusion efficiency and bone density by CT in patients with different vertical facial morphology. J Oral Rehabil 42:355–362. https://doi.org/10.1111/joor.12261CrossRefPubMed

32.

Ohiomoba H, Sonis A, Yansane A, Friedland B (2017) Quantitative evaluation of maxillary alveolar cortical bone thickness and density using computed tomography imaging. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 151:82–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2016.05.015CrossRefPubMed

33.

Khan SIR, Rao D, Ramachandran A, Ashok BV (2020) Comparison of bite force on the dominant and nondominant sides of patients with habitual unilateral chewing: a pilot study. Gen Dent 68:60–63PubMed

34.

Jonasson G, Kiliaridis S (2005) Changes in the bucco-lingual thickness of the mandibular alveolar process and skeletal bone mineral density in dentate women: a 5-yr prospective study. Eur J Oral Sci 113:114–120. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0722.2005.00207.xCrossRefPubMed

35.

Gomes SG, Custodio W, Faot F, Cury AA, Garcia RC (2011) Chewing side, bite force symmetry, and occlusal contact area of subjects with different facial vertical patterns. Braz oral res 25:446–452. https://doi.org/10.1590/s1806-83242011005000014CrossRefPubMed

36.

Swasty D, Lee J, Huang JC, Maki K, Gansky SA, Hatcher D et al (2011) Cross-sectional human mandibular morphology as assessed in vivo by cone-beam computed tomography in patients with different vertical facial dimensions. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 139:e377–e389. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2009.10.039CrossRefPubMed

37.

Sadek MM, Sabet NE, Hassan IT (2015) Alveolar bone mapping in subjects with different vertical facial dimensions. Eur J Orthod 37:194–201. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cju034CrossRefPubMed

38.

Xiao D, Gao H, Ren Y (2011) Craniofacial morphological characteristics of Chinese adults with normal occlusion and different skeletal divergence. Eur J Orthod 33:198–204. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjq064CrossRefPubMed

39.

Evangelista K, Vasconcelos Kde F, Bumann A, Hirsch E, Nitka M, Silva MA (2010) Dehiscence and fenestration in patients with Class I and Class II Division 1 malocclusion assessed with cone-beam computed tomography. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 138:133.e1–133.e7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2010.02.021CrossRefPubMed

40.

Wang CW, Yu SH, Mandelaris GA, Wang HL (2020) Is periodontal phenotype modification therapy beneficial for patients receiving orthodontic treatment? An American Academy of Periodontology best evidence review. J Periodontol 91:299–310. https://doi.org/10.1002/JPER.19-0037CrossRefPubMed

41.

Sadek MM, Sabet NE, Hassan IT (2016) Three-dimensional mapping of cortical bone thickness in subjects with different vertical facial dimensions. Prog Orthod 17:32. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40510-016-0145-xCrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Title: Evaluation´ of mandibular alveolar bone in patients with different vertical facial patterns
A cross-sectional CBCT study
Authors: Assistant Prof. Sibel Akbulut
Associate Prof. Dr. Seval Bayrak
Publication date: 05-07-2022
Publisher: Springer Medizin
Keywords: Digital Volume Tomography
Digital Volume Tomography
Published in: Journal of Orofacial Orthopedics / Fortschritte der Kieferorthopädie / Issue 2/2024
Print ISSN: 1434-5293
Electronic ISSN: 1615-6714
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00056-022-00408-4

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Evaluation´ of mandibular alveolar bone in patients with different vertical facial patterns

A cross-sectional CBCT study

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 2/2024

Soft tissue changes with skeletal anchorage in comparison to conventional anchorage protocols in the treatment of bimaxillary proclination patients treated with premolar extraction

Anatomical and immunohistochemical analyses of the fusion of the premaxillary–maxillary suture in human fetuses

Low-level laser therapy, piezocision, or their combination vs. conventional treatment for orthodontic tooth movement

Mitteilungen der DGKFO

Three-dimensional mandibular characteristics in skeletal malocclusion

Oral health-related quality of life in patients with cleft lip and/or palate or Robin sequence