Published in:
Open Access 01-12-2017 | Research article
Dental anomalies: prevalence and associations between them in a large sample of non-orthodontic subjects, a cross-sectional study
Published in: BMC Oral Health | Issue 1/2017
Login to get accessAbstract
Background
To analyze the prevalence and associations between dental anomalies detectable on panoramic radiographs in a sample of non-orthodontic growing subjects.
Methods
For this cross-sectional study, digital panoramic radiographs of 5005 subjects were initially screened from a single radiographic center in Rome. Inclusion criteria were: subjects who were aged 8–12 years, Caucasian, and had good diagnostic quality radiographs. Syndromic subjects, those with craniofacial malformation, or orthodontic patients were excluded and this led to a sample of 4706 subjects [mean (SD) age = 9.6 (1.2) years, 2366 males and 2340 females]. Sample was subsequently divided into four subgroups (8, 9, 10, and 11–12 year-old groups). Two operators examined panoramic radiographs to observe the presence of common dental anomalies. The prevalence and associations between dental anomalies were also investigated.
Results
The overall prevalence of dental anomalies was 20.9%. Approximately, 17.9% showed only one anomaly, 2.7% two anomalies, while only 0.3% had more than two anomalies. The most frequent anomalies were the displacement of maxillary canine (7.5%), hypodontia (7.1%), impacted teeth (3.9%), tooth ankylosis (2.8%), and tooth transposition (1.4%). The lower right second premolar was the most frequent missing teeth; 3.7% had only one tooth agenesis, and 0.08% had six or more missing tooth (Oligodontia). Mesiodens was the most common type of supernumerary tooth (0.66%). Two subjects had taurodontic tooth (0.04%). Tooth transpositions and displacement of maxillary canine were seen in 1.4 and 7.5%, retrospectively (approximately 69 and 58% were in the 8 and 9 year-old groups, retrospectively). Significant associations were detected between the different dental anomalies (P < .05).
Conclusions
The results of our study revealed significant associations among different dental anomalies and provide further evidences to support common etiological factors.