Imaging Science in Dentistry

Korean Academy of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology (대한영상치의학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Quantitative evaluation of palatal bone thickness in patients with normal and open vertical skeletal configurations using cone-beam computed tomography

  • Suteerapongpun, Piyoros (Department of Orthodontics and Pediatric Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Chiang Mai University) ;
  • Wattanachai, Tanapan (Department of Orthodontics and Pediatric Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Chiang Mai University) ;
  • Janhom, Apirum (Department of Oral Biology and Diagnostic Sciences, Faculty of Dentistry, Chiang Mai University) ;
  • Tripuwabhrut, Polbhat (Department of Orthodontics and Pediatric Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Chiang Mai University) ;
  • Jotikasthira, Dhirawat (Department of Orthodontics and Pediatric Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Chiang Mai University)
  • Received : 2017.08.12
  • Accepted : 2018.01.24
  • Published : 2018.03.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Purpose: To perform a comparative analysis of the palatal bone thickness in Thai patients exhibiting class I malocclusion according to whether they exhibited a normal or open vertical skeletal configuration using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). Materials and Methods: Thirty CBCT images of Thai orthodontic patients (15-30 years of age) exhibiting class I malocclusion with a normal or open vertical skeletal configuration were selected. Palatal bone thickness was measured in a 3.0-mm grid pattern on both the right and left sides. The palatal bone thickness of the normal-bite and open-bite groups was compared using the independent t-test. The level of significance was established at P<.05. Results: The palatal bone thickness in the normal-bite group ranged from $2.2{\pm}1.0mm$ to $12.6{\pm}4.1mm$. The palatal bone thickness in the open-bite group ranged from $1.9{\pm}1.1mm$ to $13.2{\pm}2.3mm$. The palatal bone thickness was lower at almost all sites in patients with open bite than in those with normal bite. Significant differences were found at almost all anteroposterior sites along the 3 most medial sections (3.0, 6.0, and 9.0 mm lateral to the midsagittal plane)(P<.05). Conclusion: Class I malocclusion with open vertical skeletal configuration may affect palatal bone thickness, so the placement of temporary anchorage devices or miniscrew implants in the palatal area in such patients should be performed with caution.

Keywords

References

  1. Lin LH, Huang GW, Chen CS. Etiology and treatment modalities of anterior open bite malocclusion. J Exp Clin Med 2013; 5: 1-4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecm.2013.01.004
  2. Antoszewska J, Papadopoulos MA, Park HS, Ludwig B. Fiveyear experience with orthodontic miniscrew implants: a retrospective investigation of factors influencing success rates. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2009; 136: 158.e1-10.
  3. Manni A, Cozzani M, Tamborrino F, De Rinaldis S, Menini A. Factors influencing the stability of miniscrews. A retrospective study on 300 miniscrews. Eur J Orthod 2011; 33: 388-95. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjq090
  4. Moon CH, Park HK, Nam JS, Im JS, Baek SH. Relationship between vertical skeletal pattern and success rate of orthodontic mini-implants. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2010; 138: 51-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2008.08.032
  5. Ozdemir F, Tozlu M, Germec Cakan D. Quantitative evaluation of alveolar cortical bone density in adults with different vertical facial types using cone-beam computed tomography. Korean J Orthod 2014; 44: 36-43. https://doi.org/10.4041/kjod.2014.44.1.36
  6. Ozdemir F, Tozlu M, Germec-Cakan D. Cortical bone thickness of the alveolar process measured with cone-beam computed tomography in patients with different facial types. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2013; 143: 190-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2012.09.013
  7. Ludwig B, Glasl B, Bowman SJ, Wilmes B, Kinzinger GS, Lisson JA. Anatomical guidelines for miniscrew insertion: palatal sites. J Clin Orthod 2011; 45: 433-41.
  8. Baumgaertel S. Quantitative investigation of palatal bone depth and cortical bone thickness for mini-implant placement in adults. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2009; 136: 104-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2008.11.020
  9. Kang S, Lee SJ, Ahn SJ, Heo MS, Kim TW. Bone thickness of the palate for orthodontic mini-implant anchorage in adults. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2007; 131: S74-81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2005.09.029
  10. Gracco A, Lombardo L, Cozzani M, Siciliani G. Quantitative cone-beam computed tomography evaluation of palatal bone thickness for orthodontic miniscrew placement. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2008; 134: 361-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2007.01.027
  11. Nakahara K, Matsunaga S, Abe S, Tamatsu Y, Kageyama I, Hashimoto M, et al. Evaluation of the palatal bone for placement of orthodontic mini-implants in Japanese adults. Cranio 2012; 30: 72-9. https://doi.org/10.1179/crn.2012.008
  12. Gahleitner A, Podesser B, Schick S, Watzek G, Imhof H. Dental CT and orthodontic implants: imaging technique and assessment of available bone volume in the hard palate. Eur J Radiol 2004; 51: 257-62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2003.11.021
  13. Stockmann P, Schlegel KA, Srour S, Neukam FW, Fenner M, Felszeghy E. Which region of the median palate is a suitable location of temporary orthodontic anchorage devices? A histomorphometric study on human cadavers aged 15-20 years. Clin Oral Implants Res 2009; 20: 306-12. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2008.01647.x
  14. Henriksen B, Bavitz B, Kelly B, Harn SD. Evaluation of bone thickness in the anterior hard palate relative to midsagittal orthodontic implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2003; 18: 578-81.
  15. Jung BA, Wehrbein H, Heuser L, Kunkel M. Vertical palatal bone dimensions on lateral cephalometry and cone-beam computed tomography: implications for palatal implant placement. Clin Oral Implants Res 2011; 22: 664-8. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2010.02021.x
  16. Wehrbein H, Merz BR, Diedrich P. Palatal bone support for orthodontic implant anchorage-a clinical and radiological study. Eur J Orthod 1999; 21: 65-70. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/21.1.65
  17. Winsauer H, Vlachojannis C, Bumann A, Vlachojannis J, Chrubasik S. Paramedian vertical palatal bone height for mini-implant insertion: a systematic review. Eur J Orthod 2014; 36: 541-9. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjs068
  18. Bernhart T, Vollgruber A, Gahleitner A, Dortbudak O, Haas R. Alternative to the median region of the palate for placement of an orthodontic implant. Clin Oral Implants Res 2000; 11: 595-601. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.2000.011006595.x
  19. Frost HM. The mechanostat: a proposed pathogenic mechanism of osteoporoses and the bone mass effects of the mechanical and nonmechanical agents. Bone Miner 1987; 2: 73-85.
  20. Horner KA, Behrents RG, Kim KB, Buschang PH. Cortical bone and ridge thickness of hyperdivergent and hypodivergent adults. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2012; 142: 170-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2012.03.021
  21. Janovic A, Milovanovic P, Saveljic I, Nikolic D, Hahn M, Rakocevic Z, et al. Microstructural properties of the mid-facial bones in relation to the distribution of occlusal loading. Bone 2014; 68: 108-14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bone.2014.07.032
  22. Strait DS, Richmond BG, Spencer MA, Ross CF, Dechow PC, Wood BA. Masticatory biomechanics and its relevance to early hominid phylogeny: an examination of palatal thickness using finite-element analysis. J Hum Evol 2007; 52: 585-99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhevol.2006.11.019
  23. Menegaz RA, Sublett SV, Figueroa SD, Hoffman TJ, Ravosa MJ. Phenotypic plasticity and function of the hard palate in growing rabbits. Anat Rec (Hoboken) 2009; 292: 277-84. https://doi.org/10.1002/ar.20840
  24. Janovic A, Saveljic I, Vukicevic A, Nikolic D, Rakocevic Z, Jovicic G, et al. Occlusal load distribution through the cortical and trabecular bone of the human mid-facial skeleton in natural dentition: a three-dimensional finite element study. Ann Anat 2015; 197: 16-23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aanat.2014.09.002
  25. Toro-Ibacache V, Zapata Munoz V, O'Higgins P. The relationship between skull morphology, masticatory muscle force and cranial skeletal deformation during biting. Ann Anat 2016; 203: 59-68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aanat.2015.03.002
  26. Johari M, Kaviani F, Saeedi A. Relationship between the thickness of cortical bone at maxillary mid-palatal area and facial height using CBCT. Open Dent J 2015; 9: 287-91. https://doi.org/10.2174/1874210601509010287
  27. Kyung SH. A study on the bone thickness of midpalatal suture area for miniscrew insertion. Korean J Orthod 2004; 34: 63-70.

Cited by

  1. Osteometric Analysis of Palatal Bone Thickness for Orthodontic Miniscrew Placement vol.32, pp.3, 2019, https://doi.org/10.11637/aba.2019.32.3.93
  2. Optimal sites for mini‐implant insertion in the lingual or palatal alveolar cortical bone as assessed by cone beam computed tomography in South Indian population vol.24, pp.1, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1111/ocr.12415
  3. Palatal temporary skeletal anchorage devices (TSADs): What to know and how to do? vol.24, pp.suppl, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1111/ocr.12451
  4. Palatal bone thickness at the implantation area of maxillary skeletal expander in adult patients with skeletal Class III malocclusion: a cone-beam computed tomography study vol.21, pp.1, 2021, https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-021-01489-0