Labial and lingual alveolar bone thickness of adult tooth root

doi:10.3969/j.issn.2095-4344.2013.15.008

Abstract

Abstract:

BACKGROUND: Oral treatment is affected by the root position and the surrounding bone plate thickness of the alveolar bone, and the improper teeth control can cause iatrogenic complications. The scholars have conducted the research about the jaw, such as anatomical observation, bone thickness or bone density. However, the research regarding the spatial position of the root within the alveolar bone and its relationship with the surrounding bone is less of a concern.
OBJECTIVE: To establish a digital three-dimensional computer model of the jaw, and then to measure the thickness of labial and lingual alveolar bone around the tooth root, providing a reference for orthodontic tooth movement design and tooth extraction.
METHODS: A total of 70 young adult orthodontic patients were selected with complete dentition and with no bone absorption shown on panoramic radiographs. The maxillofacial region was scanned using dental cone beam CT machine. Collected data were input into a computer workstation to implement coronal or sagittal multi-planar reconstruction with high-resolution three-dimensional images, and then raw data at DICOM format were outputted to the integrated three-dimensional design software, Invivo5 software, for measurement.
RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: The digital and virtual reconstruction model of the jaw could be observed and measured from the multi-plane, and the mean alveolar thickness was measured with every root in 70 patients. The mean lingual alveolar bone thickness of anterior tooth was thicker than the labial (P < 0.05). Besides the dental cervix of upper premolars, the mean lingual alveolar bone thickness of premolars was thicker than the labial (P < 0.05). There were no differences when the bilateral measurements were compared for upper molars and mandibular first molar (P > 0.05), but a significant difference between labial alveolar bone and lingual alveolar bone was noted in the mandibular second molar (P < 0.01). The results confirmed that the significant difference exists between lingual and labial alveolar bone thickness of the young adults at different tooth positions.

Key words: tissue construction, oral tissue construction, cone-beam CT, root of tooth, alveolar bone, lingual, buccal, thickness, orthodontics, tooth movement, tooth extraction, tooth fracture

CLC Number:

R318

Ding Ji-qun, Fang Jian-qiang, Yuan Chang-qing, Chen Jie . Labial and lingual alveolar bone thickness of adult tooth root[J]. Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research, doi: 10.3969/j.issn.2095-4344.2013.15.008.

Figures/Tables 2

References

[1] Guo QY, Zhang SJ, Liu H, et al. Three-dimensional evaluation of upper anterior alveolar bone dehiscence after incisor retraction and intrusion in adult patients with bimaxillary protrusion malocclusion. J Zhejiang Univ Sci B. 2011;12(12):990-997.

[2] Nahm KY, Kang JH, Moon SC, et al. Alveolar bone loss around incisors in Class I bidentoalveolar protrusion patients: a retrospective three-dimensional cone beam CT study. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2012;41(6): 481-488.

[3] Evangelista K, Vasconcelos Kde F, Bumann A, et al. Dehiscence and fenestration in patients with Class I and Class Ⅱ Division 1 malocclusion assessed with cone-beam computed tomography. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2010;138(2):e1-e7.

[4] Fuh LJ, Huang HL, Chen CS, et al. Variations in bone density at dental implant sites in different regions of the jawbone. J Oral Rehabil. 2010;37(5):346-351.

[5] Choi JH, Park CH, Yi SW, et al. Bone density measurement in interdental areas with simulated placement of orthodontic miniscrew implants. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2009; 136(6):e1-e12.

[6] Farnsworth D, Rossouw PE, Ceen RF, et al. Cortical bone thickness at common miniscrew implant placement sites. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2011;139(4): 495-503.

[7] Park J, Cho HJ. Three-dimensional evaluation of interradicular spaces and cortical bone thickness for the placement and initial stability of microimplants in adults. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2009;136(3): e1-e12.

[8] Vasak C, Watzak G, Gahleitner A, et al. Computed tomography-based evaluation of template (NobelGuide™)-guided implant positions: a prospective radiological study. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2011;22(10): 1157-1163.

[9] Blok Y, Gravesteijn FA, van Ruijven LJ, et al. Micro-architecture and mineralization of the human alveolar bone obtained with microCT. Arch Oral Biol. 2012.

[10] Kapila S, Conley RS, Harrell WE Jr. The current status of cone beam computed tomography imaging in orthodontics. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2011;40(1):24-34.

[11] State Council of the People’s Republic of China. Administrative Regulations on Medical Institution. 1994-09-01.

[12] Lee SL, Kim HJ, Son MK, et al. Anthropometric analysis of maxillary anterior buccal bone of Korean adults using cone-beam CT. J Adv Prosthodont. 2010;2(3):92-96.

[13] Kumar V, Ludlow J, Soares Cevidanes LH, et al. In vivo comparison of conventional and cone beam CT synthesized cephalograms. Angle Orthod. 2008;78(5): 873-879.

[14] Jeffrey CK, Kwong J. Image quality produced by different cone beam cephalometry tomography settings. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2008;133(2):317-327.

[15] Suomalainen A, Vehmas T, Kortesniemi M, et al. Accuracy of linear measurements using dental cone beam and conventional multislice computed tomography. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2008;37(1):10-17.

[16] Suomalainen A, Kiljunen T, Käser Y, et al. Dosimetry and image quality of four dental cone beam computed tomography scanners compared with multislice computed tomography scanners. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2009;38(6): 367-378.

[17] Loubele M, Bogaerts R, Van Dijck E, et al. Comparison between effective radiation dose of CBCT and MSCT scanners for dentomaxillofacial applications. Eur J Radiol. 2009;71(3):461-468.

[18] Roberts JA, Drage NA, Davies J, et al. Effective dose from cone beam CT examinations in dentistry. Br J Radiol. 2009;82(973):35-40.

[19] Huang QH, Wang QB, Luo MY, et al. Xiangnan Xueyuan Xuebao. 2009;11(2):4-6.

[20] Tyndall DA, Rathore S. Cone-beam CT diagnostic applications: caries, periodontal bone assessment, and endodontic applications. Dent Clin N Am. 2008;52(4):825-841.

[21] Kau CH, Richmond S, Palomo JM, et al. Three-dimensional cone beam computerized tomography in orthodontics. J Orthod. 2005;32(4):282-293.

[22] Ludlow JB, Ivanovic M. Comparative dosimetry of dental CBCT devices and 64-slice CT for oral and maxillofacial radiology. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2008;106(1):106-114．

[23] Zhao BD, Li NY, Zhou YG, et al. A study of rebuild of a three-dimensional anatomic model of mandibles. Huaxi Kouqiang Yixue Zazhi. 2002;20(1):21-23.

[24] Januário AL, Duarte WR, Barriviera M, et al. Dimension of the facial bone wall in the anterior maxilla: a cone-beam computed tomography study. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2011;22(10):1168-1171.

[25] Ghassemian M, Nowzari H, Lajolo C, et al. The thickness of facial alveolar bone overlying healthy maxillary anterior teeth. J Periodontol. 2012;83(2):187-197.

[26] Henneman S, Von den Hoff JW, Maltha JC. Mechanobiology of tooth movement. Eur J Orthod. 2008; 30(3):299-306.

[27] Anwar N, Fida M. Compensation for vertical dysplasia and its clinical application. Eur J Orthod. 2009;31(5):516-522.

[28] 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.

[29] Poggio PM, Incorvati C, Velo S, et al. “Safe Zones”: A Guide for miniscrew positioning in the maxillary and mandibular Arch. Angle Orthod. 2006;76(2):191-197.

[30] Kim SH, Yoon HG, Choi YS, et al. Evaluation of interdental space of the maxillary posterior area for orthodontic mini-implants with cone-beam computed tomography. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2009;135(5):635-641.

[31] Fayed MM, Pazera P, Katsaros C. Optimal sites for orthodontic mini-implant placement assessed by cone beam computed tomography. Angle Orthod. 2010;80(5): 939-951.

[32] Liou EI, Chen PH, Wang YC, et al. A computed tomographic image study on the thickness of the infrazygomatic crest of the maxilla and its clinical implications for mini screw insertion. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2007;131(3):352-356.

[33] Lin JR, Chen S. Treatment of severe class Ⅲ with buccal shelf mini-screws. Zhonghua Kouqiang Zhengjixue Zazhi. 2010;17(3):121-126.

[34] Lin JR. The new method of IZC mini-screws placement. Zhonghua Kouqiang Zhengjixue Zazhi. 2009;16(1):38-44.

[35] Kwak HH, Park HD, Yoon HR, et al. Topographic anatomy of the inferior wall of the maxillary sinus in Koreans. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2004;33(4):382-388.

[36] Bodner L, Brennan PA, McLeod NM. Characteristics of iatrogenic mandibular fractures associated with tooth removal: review and analysis of 189 cases. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2011;49(7):567-572.