Morphological characteristics of the incisive alveolar bone in adolescents with skeletal class II malocclusion of different vertical facial skeletal types

doi:10.3969/j.issn.2095-4344.2015.07.007

Abstract

Abstract:

BACKGROUND: In the process of tooth movement, alveolar bone remodeling process is not only influenced by orthodontic force approach and balance between lip and tongue, but also limited by alveolar bone morphology.

OBJECTIVE: To preliminarily study the morphological characteristics of the incisive alveolar bone in adolescent with skeletal class II malocclusion of different vertical facial skeletal types.

METHODS: Sixty patients with class II malocclusion, aged 11-16 years, were divided into three groups: (1) high-angle group: the angle between the anterior skull base and mandibular plane was > 40°, and the angle between the orbitomeatal plane and mandibular plane angle was > 32°. (2) Low-angle group: the angle between the anterior skull base and mandibular plane was < 29°, and the angle between the orbitomeatal plane and mandibular plane angle was < 22°. (3) Average angle group: the angle between the anterior skull base and mandibular plane was ≥ 29°, ≤ 40°, and the angle between the orbitomeatal plane and mandibular plane angle was ≥ 22°, ≤ 32°. Each group included 20 subjects. Cephalometric films were taken and measured to analyze the morphological characteristics of the incisive alveolar bone with SPSS 17.0.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: (1) The thickness of the apical alveolar: the UBP, LBP value and the total thickness of the apical alveolar were significantly different between the three groups (P < 0.05). The ULP and LLP values were significant different between the high-angle and low-angle groups (P < 0.05). (2) The alveolar height: the UBH, ULH, LBH, and LLH values showed significant differences among the three groups (P < 0.05). These findings indicate that the thickness of the labial alveolar bone of the incisor is obviously thinner in the high-angle malocclusion than others, indicating it is very important to prevent the fenestration and bone cracking. The labial alveolar bone of the low-angle malocclusion is thicker, and therefore, the adduction range of the anterior teeth is wider.

中国组织工程研究杂志出版内容重点：组织构建；骨细胞；软骨细胞；细胞培养；成纤维细胞；血管内皮细胞；骨质疏松；组织工程

全文链接：

Key words: Orthodontics, Malocclusion, Alveolar Process

CLC Number:

R318

Ruan Xiao-hui, Li Liang, Wu Pei-ling . Morphological characteristics of the incisive alveolar bone in adolescents with skeletal class II malocclusion of different vertical facial skeletal types[J]. Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research, 2015, 19(7): 1018-1022.

Figures/Tables 5

References

[1]傅民魁,张丁,王邦康,等.中国25392名儿童与青少年错合畸形患病率的研究[J].华口腔医学杂志,2002,37(5):371-373.
[2]王胜林,戴红卫.骨性Ⅱ类错合颅面形态特征研究进展[J].人民军医,2006,49(11):669-670.
[3]Verma SL,Sharma VP,Sinqh GP,et al.Comparative assessment of soft-tissue changes in Class II Division 1 patients following extraction and non-extraction treatment. Dent Res J(Isfahan).2013;10(6):764-771.
[4]田野,叶禹,白丁.骨性Ⅱ类畸形拔牙掩饰治疗策略[J].中国实用口腔科杂志,2010,3(5):261-265.
[5]梁妍华,栗震亚.兰州地区汉族青少年软组织侧貌唇位的评价[J].中国组织工程研究,2013,17(20):3777-3784.
[6]Baysal A,Ucar F,Buyuk SK,et al.Alveolar bone thickness and lower incisor position in skeletal Class I and Class II malocclusions assessed with cone-beam computed tomography. Korean J Orthod.2013;43(3):134-140.
[7]Gracco A,Lombardo L,Mancuso G,et al.Upper incisor position and bony support in untreated patients as seen on CBCT. Angle Orthod.2009;79(4):692-702.
[8]Enhos S,Uysal T,Yagci A,et al.Dehiscence and fenestration in patients with different vertical growth patterns assessed with cone-beam computed tomography.Angle Orthod.2012;82(5): 868-874.
[9]Hua Y,Nackaerts O,Duyck J,et al.Bone quality assessment based on cone beam computed tomography imaging.Clin Oral Implants Res.2009;20(8):767-771.
[10]Makedonas D,Lund H,Hansen K.Root resorption diagnosed with cone beam computed tomography after 6 months and at the end of orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances.Angle Orthod.2013,83(3):389-393.
[11]Uysal T,Yagci A,Ozer T,et al.Mandibular anterior bony support and incisor crowding: Is there a relationship?.Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop.2012;142(5):645-653.
[12]Ahn HW, Lee DY, Park YG, et al.Accelerated decompensation of mandibular incisors in surgical skeletal class III patients by using augmented corticotomy: a preliminary study.Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop.2012;142(2):199-206.
[13]Alexxander RG.亚历山大直丝弓技术一口腔正畸矫治原理与实践[M].邵金陵,冯雪.等译.西安:世界图书出版西安公司, 2001: 67-68．
[14]Ahn Hw,Moon SC,Baek sH.Morphometric evaluation of changes in the alveolar bone and roots of the maxillary anterior teeth before and after en masse retraction using cone-beam computed tomography.AngleOrthod.2013;83(2): 212-221.
[15]Grib DG,Yatabe Ms,OzawaTO,et aL.Alveolar bone morphology under the Perspective of the computed tomography: defining the biological limits of tooth movement. Dental Press J Orthod.2010;15(5):192-205.
[16]Bruno AG, Broe KE,Zhang X,et al.Vertebral size, bone density, and strength in men and women matched for age and areal spine BMD.J Bone Miner Res. 2014;29(3):562-569.
[17]Fuhrmann RAW.Three-dimensional evaluation of periodontal remodeling during orthodontic treatment.Semin Orthod. 2002; 8(1):23-28.
[18]Shoreibah EA,Ibrahim SA,Attia MS,et aL.Clinical and radiographic evaluation of bone grafting in corticoto my facilitated orthodontics in adults.J Int Acad Periodontol. 2012; 14(4):105-113.
[19]Yagci A,Veli I,Uysal T,et al.Dehiscence and fenestration in skeletal C1ass I, Ⅱ and Ⅲ malocclusions assessed with cone-beam computed tomography.Angle Orthod. 2012;82(1): 67-74.
[20]Kook YA,Kim G,Kim Y.Comparison of alveolar bone loss around incisors in normal occlusion samples and surgical skeletal class IIIpatients.Angle Orthod.2012;82(4):645-652.
[21]Patcas R, Müller L, Ullrich O, et al. Accuracy of cone-beam computed tomography at different resolutions assessed on the bony covering of the mandibular anterior teeth.Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2012;141(1):41-50.
[22]YamadaC,Kitai N,Kakimotoe N,et al.Spatial relationships between the mandibular centra l Incisor and associated alveolar bone in adults with mandibular prognathism.Angle Orthod.2007;77(5):766-772．
[23]Yu Q,Pan XG,Ji GP, et al.The association between lower incisal inclination and Morphology of the supporting alveolar bone:a cone-beam CT study.Int J Oral Sci.2009;1(4):217-223.
[24]张莉,王博,房兵.骨性Ⅲ类错下前牙区牙槽骨形态的锥形束CT分析[J].中国口腔颌面外科杂志,2012,1(10):38-41.
[25]钟金晟,柳登高,欧阳翔英,等.应用锥形束CT评价前牙唇舌侧牙槽骨高度及厚度的研究[J].山东医药,2012,52(4):41-44．
[26]涂伶俐.正畸过程中的牙根吸收及其生物力学特征[J].中国组织工程研究与临床康复,2010,14(7):1303-1306.
[27]Anwar N,Fida M.Evaluation of dentoalvcelar compensation in skeIetaI class II maIoccIusion in a Pakistani University HospitaI setting.Coll Physicians Surg Pak.2009;19(1):11-16.
[28]刘爱青,张继东.II类骨面型前牙深覆盖患者牙与牙槽骨特征分析[J].广东牙病防治,2011,19(12):627-630.
[29]陈晶晶,张端强.正常合青少年不同垂直骨面型切牙区牙槽骨宽度研究[J].临床口腔医学杂志,2009,4(4):232-234.
[30]叶艳艳,丁寅,李娟等.成人骨性II类错合患者不同垂直骨面型的切牙代偿情况研究[J].中国美容医学,2013,1(1):181-184.
[31]Nabila Anwar,Mubassar Fida.Compensation for vertical dysplasia and its clinical application. Eur J Orhod.2009; 13(1):1-7.
[32]Fontana M, Cozzani M,Caprioglio A.Soft tissue, skeletal and dentoal- veolar changes following conventional anchorage molar distalization therapy in class II non-growing subjects: a multicentric retrospective study.Prog Orthod.2012;13(1):30-41.
[33]Sarikaya S,Haydar B, Ciger S,et al.Changes in alveolar bone thickness due to retraction of anterior teeth. Am J Orthod Dentfacial.2002, 122(1):15.
[34]周蕾,周力,吴浩,等.不同面部生长型正常合及安氏II类1分类错牙合的前牙倾斜度及牙代偿特征[J].华西口腔医学杂志, 2010, 28(5): 492-494.
[35]刘东旭,刘文.正常合中不同垂直骨面型切牙唇舌向倾斜度的测量分析[J].口腔正畸学,2003,10(4):175-177.