Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Journal of Orofacial Orthopedics / Fortschritte der Kieferorthopädie 6/2021

01-11-2021 | Digital Volume Tomography | Original Article

Comparison of dental arch forms created from assessment of teeth, alveolar bone, and the overlying soft tissue

Authors: Rick O’Neil, D.M.D, M.S, Prof. Dr. Chung H. Kau, BDS, MScD, MBA, PhD, FDS, FFD, FAMS

Published in: Journal of Orofacial Orthopedics / Fortschritte der Kieferorthopädie | Issue 6/2021

Login to get access

Abstract

Objective

The objective of this study was to determine whether there are differences among the arch forms created from assessments of tooth surfaces, alveolar bone, and overlying soft tissue.

Materials and methods

This study included 18 individuals who presented with a class I malocclusion, mild crowding, and a cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) image of good diagnostic quality. The facial axis point was chosen to create the arch form from teeth, the Bowman–Kau (BK) point was used to establish the arch form from alveolar bone, and the WALA ridge was used to calculate the soft tissue arch form. A predetermined algorithm was then used to create five separate arch forms per patient. These arch forms were categorized according to shape and were superimposed. The distances between the tooth-, bone-, and soft tissue-derived arch forms were calculated.

Results

The calculated distances between all arch forms were significantly different. The distances between the tooth- and bone-derived arch forms were larger for the mandible compared to the maxilla (mean 3.30 vs. 2.48 mm, respectively). The larger distances seemed to be located more posteriorly in the arch than anteriorly. The distance between tooth- and soft tissue-derived arch forms was largest for the second premolar (2.35 ± 1.59 mm), first molar (2.86 ± 0.63 mm), and second molar (3.25 ± 0.87 mm). There were no significant differences in the distance between the tooth- and either bone- or soft tissue-derived arch forms with regard to sex.

Conclusions

The arch form shapes obtained from the teeth, alveolar bone, and soft tissue are correlated and show the same general shape. Although future large-scale studies are needed for confirmation, our results suggest that evaluating the easily visualized external features, including the WALA ridge, can adequately predict the underlying bone shape, and thus the desired arch form. Nevertheless, the shapes vary significantly between patients, so the final treatment plan should be individualized rather than relying on over-simplified general wire shapes.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Braun S, Hnat WP, Fender DE, Legan HL (1998) The form of the human dental arch. Angle Orthod 68(1):29–36PubMed Braun S, Hnat WP, Fender DE, Legan HL (1998) The form of the human dental arch. Angle Orthod 68(1):29–36PubMed
2.
go back to reference Proffit WR (1978) Equilibrium theory revisited: factors influencing position of the teeth. Angle Orthod 48(3):175–186PubMed Proffit WR (1978) Equilibrium theory revisited: factors influencing position of the teeth. Angle Orthod 48(3):175–186PubMed
3.
go back to reference Lee RT (1999) Arch width and form: a review. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 3(115):305–313CrossRef Lee RT (1999) Arch width and form: a review. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 3(115):305–313CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Gupta D, Miner RM, Arai K, Will LA (2010) Comparison of the mandibular dental and basal arch forms in adults and children with class I and class II malocclusions. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 138(1):10e1–10e8 (discussion –1) Gupta D, Miner RM, Arai K, Will LA (2010) Comparison of the mandibular dental and basal arch forms in adults and children with class I and class II malocclusions. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 138(1):10e1–10e8 (discussion –1)
5.
go back to reference Andrews LFAW (2000) The six elements of orofacial harmony. Andrews J 1:13–22 Andrews LFAW (2000) The six elements of orofacial harmony. Andrews J 1:13–22
6.
go back to reference Ball RL, Miner RM, Will LA, Arai K (2010) Comparison of dental and apical base arch forms in Class II Division 1 and Class I malocclusions. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 138(1):41–50CrossRef Ball RL, Miner RM, Will LA, Arai K (2010) Comparison of dental and apical base arch forms in Class II Division 1 and Class I malocclusions. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 138(1):41–50CrossRef
7.
go back to reference Ronay V, Miner RM, Will LA, Arai K (2008) Mandibular arch form: the relationship between dental and basal anatomy. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 134(3):430–438CrossRef Ronay V, Miner RM, Will LA, Arai K (2008) Mandibular arch form: the relationship between dental and basal anatomy. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 134(3):430–438CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Knox J, Jones M, Durning P (1993) An ideal preformed archwire? Br J Orthod 20(1):65–70CrossRef Knox J, Jones M, Durning P (1993) An ideal preformed archwire? Br J Orthod 20(1):65–70CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Gafni Y, Tzur-Gadassi L, Nojima K, McLaughlin RP, Abed Y, Redlich M (2011) Comparison of arch forms between Israeli and North American white populations. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 139(3):339–344CrossRef Gafni Y, Tzur-Gadassi L, Nojima K, McLaughlin RP, Abed Y, Redlich M (2011) Comparison of arch forms between Israeli and North American white populations. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 139(3):339–344CrossRef
10.
go back to reference Kook YA, Nojima K, Moon HB, McLaughlin RP, Sinclair PM (2004) Comparison of arch forms between Korean and North American white populations. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 126(6):680–686CrossRef Kook YA, Nojima K, Moon HB, McLaughlin RP, Sinclair PM (2004) Comparison of arch forms between Korean and North American white populations. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 126(6):680–686CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Hatcher DC (2010) Operational principles for cone-beam computed tomography. J Am Dent Assoc 141(Suppl 3):3S–6SCrossRef Hatcher DC (2010) Operational principles for cone-beam computed tomography. J Am Dent Assoc 141(Suppl 3):3S–6SCrossRef
12.
go back to reference Kau CH (2011) Creation of the virtual patient for the study of facial morphology. Facial Plast Surg Clin North Am 19(4):615–622CrossRef Kau CH (2011) Creation of the virtual patient for the study of facial morphology. Facial Plast Surg Clin North Am 19(4):615–622CrossRef
13.
go back to reference Kau CH, Li JL, Li Q, Abou Kheir N (2014) Update on cone beam technology and orthodontic analysis. Dent Clin North Am 58(3):653–669CrossRef Kau CH, Li JL, Li Q, Abou Kheir N (2014) Update on cone beam technology and orthodontic analysis. Dent Clin North Am 58(3):653–669CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Palomo JM, Kau CH, Palomo LB, Hans MG (2006) Three-dimensional cone beam computerized tomography in dentistry. Dent Today 25(11):130–132–5PubMed Palomo JM, Kau CH, Palomo LB, Hans MG (2006) Three-dimensional cone beam computerized tomography in dentistry. Dent Today 25(11):130–132–5PubMed
15.
go back to reference Lightheart KG, English JD, Kau CH, Akyalcin S, Bussa HI Jr., McGrory KR et al (2012) Surface analysis of study models generated from OrthoCAD and cone-beam computed tomography imaging. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 141(6):686–693CrossRef Lightheart KG, English JD, Kau CH, Akyalcin S, Bussa HI Jr., McGrory KR et al (2012) Surface analysis of study models generated from OrthoCAD and cone-beam computed tomography imaging. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 141(6):686–693CrossRef
16.
go back to reference Torassian G, Kau CH, English JD, Powers J, Bussa HI, Salas-Lopez MA et al (2010) Digital models vs plaster models using alginate and alginate substitute materials. Angle Orthod 80(4):474–481CrossRef Torassian G, Kau CH, English JD, Powers J, Bussa HI, Salas-Lopez MA et al (2010) Digital models vs plaster models using alginate and alginate substitute materials. Angle Orthod 80(4):474–481CrossRef
17.
go back to reference Creed B, Kau CH, English JD, Xia JJ, Lee RP (2011) A comparison of the accuracy of linear measurements obtained from cone beam computerized tomography images and digital models. Semin Orthod 17(1):49–56CrossRef Creed B, Kau CH, English JD, Xia JJ, Lee RP (2011) A comparison of the accuracy of linear measurements obtained from cone beam computerized tomography images and digital models. Semin Orthod 17(1):49–56CrossRef
18.
go back to reference Berco M, Rigali PH Jr., Miner RM, DeLuca S, Anderson NK, Will LA (2009) Accuracy and reliability of linear cephalometric measurements from cone-beam computed tomography scans of a dry human skull. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 136(1):17 e1–17 e9 (discussion –8) Berco M, Rigali PH Jr., Miner RM, DeLuca S, Anderson NK, Will LA (2009) Accuracy and reliability of linear cephalometric measurements from cone-beam computed tomography scans of a dry human skull. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 136(1):17 e1–17 e9 (discussion –8)
19.
go back to reference O’Neil R (2011) The comparison of dental arch forms obtained from teeth, alveolar bone and the overlaying soft tissue. University of Alabama Birmingham, Birmingham O’Neil R (2011) The comparison of dental arch forms obtained from teeth, alveolar bone and the overlaying soft tissue. University of Alabama Birmingham, Birmingham
20.
go back to reference Bowman M, Kau CH, Pan P (2012) Comparing Arch forms from teeth and alveolar bone—Asian Population. 2012 AADR Annual Meeting, Tampa, 21–24 March 2012 Bowman M, Kau CH, Pan P (2012) Comparing Arch forms from teeth and alveolar bone—Asian Population. 2012 AADR Annual Meeting, Tampa, 21–24 March 2012
21.
go back to reference Lundstrom A (1925) Malocclusion of the teeth regarded as a problem in correction with the apical base. Int J Orthod Oral Surg Radiogr 11:591–602CrossRef Lundstrom A (1925) Malocclusion of the teeth regarded as a problem in correction with the apical base. Int J Orthod Oral Surg Radiogr 11:591–602CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Comparison of dental arch forms created from assessment of teeth, alveolar bone, and the overlying soft tissue
Authors
Rick O’Neil, D.M.D, M.S
Prof. Dr. Chung H. Kau, BDS, MScD, MBA, PhD, FDS, FFD, FAMS
Publication date
01-11-2021
Publisher
Springer Medizin
Published in
Journal of Orofacial Orthopedics / Fortschritte der Kieferorthopädie / Issue 6/2021
Print ISSN: 1434-5293
Electronic ISSN: 1615-6714
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00056-021-00282-6

Other articles of this Issue 6/2021

Journal of Orofacial Orthopedics / Fortschritte der Kieferorthopädie 6/2021 Go to the issue

Mitteilungen der DGKFO

Mitteilungen der DGKFO