The korean journal of orthodontics (대한치과교정학회지)

The Korean Association Of Orthodontists (대한치과교정학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Sex-, growth pattern-, and growth status-related variability in maxillary and mandibular buccal cortical thickness and density

  • Schneider, Sydney (Department of Orthodontics, University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston) ;
  • Gandhi, Vaibhav (Division of Orthodontics, University of Connecticut Health) ;
  • Upadhyay, Madhur (Division of Orthodontics, University of Connecticut Health) ;
  • Allareddy, Veerasathpurush (Department of Orthodontics, Brodie Laboratory for Craniofacial Genetics, University of Illinois at Chicago) ;
  • Tadinada, Aditya (Division of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, University of Connecticut Health) ;
  • Yadav, Sumit (Division of Orthodontics, University of Connecticut Health)
  • Received : 2019.08.21
  • Accepted : 2019.12.14
  • Published : 2020.03.25
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Objective: The primary objective of this study was to quantitatively analyze the bone parameters (thickness and density) at four different interdental areas from the distal region of the canine to the mesial region of the second molar in the maxilla and the mandible. The secondary aim was to compare and contrast the bone parameters at these specific locations in terms of sex, growth status, and facial type. Methods: This retrospective cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) study reviewed 290 CBCT images of patients seeking orthodontic treatment. Cortical bone thickness in millimeters (mm) and density in pixel intensity value were measured for the regions (1) between the canine and first premolar, (2) between the first and second premolars, (3) between the second premolar and first molar, and (4) between the first and second molars. At each location, the bone thickness and density were measured at distances of 2, 6, and 10 mm from the alveolar crest. Results: The sex comparison (male vs. female) in cortical bone thickness showed no significant difference (p > 0.001). The bone density in growing subjects was significantly (p < 0.001) lower than that in non-growing subjects for most locations. There was no significant difference (p > 0.001) in bone parameters in relation to facial pattern in the maxilla and mandible for most sites. Conclusions: There was no significant sex-related difference in cortical bone thickness. The buccal cortical bone density was higher in females than in males. Bone parameters were similar for subjects with hyperdivergent, hypodivergent, and normodivergent facial patterns.

Keywords

References

  1. Fortini A, Cacciafesta V, Sfondrini MF, Cambi S, Lupoli M. Clinical applications and efficacy of miniscrews for extra-dental anchorage. Orthod 2004;1:87-98.
  2. Papadopoulos MA, Tarawneh F. The use of miniscrew implants for temporary skeletal anchorage in orthodontics: a comprehensive review. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2007;103:e6-15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tripleo.2006.11.022
  3. Alharbi F, Almuzian M, Bearn D. Miniscrews failure rate in orthodontics: systematic review and metaanalysis. Eur J Orthod 2018;40:519-30. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjx093
  4. Papageorgiou SN, Zogakis IP, Papadopoulos MA. Failure rates and associated risk factors of orthodontic miniscrew implants: a meta-analysis. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2012;142:577-95.e7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2012.05.016
  5. Kravitz ND, Kusnoto B. Risks and complications of orthodontic miniscrews. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2007;131(4 Suppl):S43-51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2006.04.027
  6. Melsen B, Verna C. Miniscrew implants: the Aarhus anchorage system. Semin Orthod 2005;11:24-31. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.sodo.2004.11.005
  7. Horn AJ. Facial height index. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1992;102:180-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/0889-5406(92)70031-5
  8. Steiner CC. Cephalometrics in clinical practice. Angle Orthod 1959;29:8-29.
  9. McNamara JA Jr. A method of cephalometric evaluation. Am J Orthod 1984;86:449-69. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0002-9416(84)90352-X
  10. Tseng YC, Wu JH, Chen HS, Chen CM, Ting CC. Effects of gripping volume in the mechanical strengths of orthodontic mini-implant. Kaohsiung J Med Sci 2017;33:578-83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.kjms.2017.03.010
  11. Motoyoshi M, Hirabayashi M, Uemura M, Shimizu N. Recommended placement torque when tightening an orthodontic mini-implant. Clin Oral Implants Res 2006;17:109-14. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2005.01211.x
  12. Baumgaertel S, Hans MG. Buccal cortical bone thickness for mini-implant placement. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2009;136:230-5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2007.10.045
  13. Marquezan M, Mattos CT, Sant'Anna EF, de Souza MM, Maia LC. Does cortical thickness influence the primary stability of miniscrews?: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Angle Orthod 2014;84:1093-103. https://doi.org/10.2319/093013-716.1
  14. Motoyoshi M, Yoshida T, Ono A, Shimizu N. Effect of cortical bone thickness and implant placement torque on stability of orthodontic mini-implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2007;22:779-84.
  15. Cha JY, Kil JK, Yoon TM, Hwang CJ. Miniscrew stability evaluated with computerized tomography scanning. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2010;137:73-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2008.03.024
  16. Iijima M, Takano M, Yasuda Y, Muguruma T, Nakagaki S, Sakakura Y, et al. Effect of the quantity and quality of cortical bone on the failure force of a miniscrew implant. Eur J Orthod 2013;35:583-9. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjs066
  17. Holm L, Cunningham SJ, Petrie A, Cousley RR. An in vitro study of factors affecting the primary stability of orthodontic mini-implants. Angle Orthod 2012;82:1022-8. https://doi.org/10.2319/011912-47.1
  18. Farnsworth D, Rossouw PE, Ceen RF, Buschang PH. Cortical bone thickness at common miniscrew implant placement sites. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2011;139:495-503. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2009.03.057
  19. Chun YS, Lim WH. Bone density at interradicular sites: implications for orthodontic mini-implant placement. Orthod Craniofac Res 2009;12:25-32. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1601-6343.2008.01434.x
  20. Ono A, Motoyoshi M, Shimizu N. Cortical bone thickness in the buccal posterior region for orthodontic mini-implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2008;37:334-40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijom.2008.01.005
  21. Cassetta M, Sofan AA, Altieri F, Barbato E. Evaluation of alveolar cortical bone thickness and density for orthodontic mini-implant placement. J Clin Exp Dent 2013;5:e245-52.
  22. Fadhil RM, Al-Khatib AR. Assessment of cortical bone density for orthodontic implants placement: computerized tomography study. Al-Rafidain Dent J 2015;15:393-8. https://doi.org/10.33899/rden.2015.160876
  23. Hiasa K, Abe Y, Okazaki Y, Nogami K, Mizumachi W, Akagawa Y. Preoperative computed tomographyderived bone densities in hounsfield units at implant sites acquired primary stability. ISRN Dent 2011; 2011:678729. https://doi.org/10.5402/2011/678729
  24. Sathapana S, Forrest A, Monsour P, Naser-ud-Din S. Age-related changes in maxillary and mandibular cortical bone thickness in relation to temporary anchorage device placement. Aust Dent J 2013;58:67-74. https://doi.org/10.1111/adj.12018
  25. Sadek MM, Sabet NE, Hassan IT. Three-dimensional mapping of cortical bone thickness in subjects with different vertical facial dimensions. Prog Orthod 2016;17:32. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40510-016-0145-x
  26. 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
  27. 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