Printer Friendly

PREVALENCE AND PATTERNS OF IMPACTED MAXILLARY CANINE IN A PESHAWAR SAMPLE.

Byline: JAMEEL KIFAYATULLAH, TANVEER HUSSAIN BANGASH, ALI AYUB and DILA BAZ KHAN

ABSTRACT

Maxillary canines are important aesthetically and functionally, but impacted canines are more difficult and time consuming to treat. Permanent maxillary canine impaction has been reported in about 1% to 5% of the population.

The objective of this study was to determine the prevalence of impacted maxillary canine in patients visiting to Khyber college of dentistry, Peshawar.

A total of 500 patients of 15 years and above were examined clinically. Those having maxillary canine impaction were advised Anterior Occlusal View and panoramic radiograph to determine the patterns of impaction by vertical parallaxing technique. Data were processed in SPSS version 16.0. The chi-squared test was used to reveal any differences in the distribution of impacted maxillary canines when stratified by gender and location (left or right).. A p-value of less than 0.05 was accepted as statistically significant.

Out of 500 patients examined 20(4%) had maxillary canine impaction. The mean age was 19.053.15 years. Age was ranged from 15 to 25 years. Female to male ratio was1.85:1. Females had more impaction of maxillary canine than males(p=0.000). Palatal were the most common in males while buccal were in females. Left side was commonly involved in impaction in both genders.

Key Words: Impacted maxillary canine, patterns of impaction, vertical parallaxing technique.

INTRODUCTION

Maxillary canines are important aesthetically and functionally, but impacted canines are more difficult and time consuming to treat.1 The eruption of permanent maxillary canine represents a complex series of events, mostly genetically based, whereby eruptive movements of the tooth germ taking place at a predetermined time and route enable the maxillary canine to find its an- tagonist at a predetermined occlusal plane.2 Maxillary canines are among the last teeth to develop in anerior maxilla and have the longest period of development.

They also have the longest and most devious path of eruption from the formation point lateral of the pisiform fossa to the final position in the dental arch.3

Impacted teeth are those with a delayed eruption time or that are not expected to erupt completely based on clinical and radiographic assessment.4 In impacted teeth, root development might have finished, but un- aided eruption is not expected to occur. Occasionally, malposition of a permanent tooth bud can lead to eruption at a wrong place. This condition is called an ectopic eruption and the tooth is called ectopic tooth.5

Permanent maxillary canine impaction has been reported in about 1% to 5% of the population.6,7

This makes the maxillary canine the second most commonly impacted tooth, after third molars.8

The following factors are known to play role in im- paction of maxillary canine: (a) tooth size-arch length discrepancies (b) prolonged retention or early loss of the deciduous canine (c) abnormal position of the tooth bud (d) the presence of an alveolar cleft (e) ankylosis (f) cystic or neoplastic formation(g) dilaceration of the root (h) iatrogenic origin and (i) idiopathic condition with no apparent cause.9,10

Impacted canines vary greatly in the inclination and location and can lead to resorption of neighboring incisors, as well as cystic degeneration. Some common sequelae of canine impaction are: (i) Labial or lingual malpositioning of the impacted tooth (ii) Migration of the neighboring teeth and loss of arch length (iii) Ex- ternal root resorption of the impacted tooth as well as the neighboring teeth (iv) Infection particularly with partial eruption resulting in pain and trismus and (v) Referred pain.11

It is known that the impaction of maxillary ca- nines occurs twice as much in females than males.12 In general, it has been reported that palatal impactions occur more frequently than buccal impactions with a ratio from 2:1 to 6:1.13,14 However, it was mentioned that there seems to be more buccal impactions in the Asian population. This finding refers to the possibili- ty of a greater occurrence of buccal maxillary canine impactions in Asians.15

The present study was done to determine the prevalence of impacted maxillary canine in patients visiting to Orthodontics department,Khyber college of dentistry, Peshawar.

METHODOLOGY

This study was conducted on a sample of Peshawar population that had been treated in the Orthodontics Department at Khyber college of dentistry Peshawar from August 2013 to February 2014. The study con- sisted of clinical and radiographic examination of 500 patients coming to the department for treatment. The patients were examined for any evidence of impacted maxillary canines (i.e., visual inspection, palpation, and/or radiographs). Clinical examination was done by conventional methods and included whole-arch in- spection; palpation to identify any retained deciduous canine; visualization of the canine bulge," splaying of the lateral incisors, lost space, crowding, or fibrous tissue overlying the canine region, and mobility of the primary canines; and a review of the patient's chrono- logical age and history of dental eruption/exfoliation patterns. Clinical examination was supplemented with a radiographic evaluation to produce an accurate diagno- sis.

Panoramic and Anterior Occlusal Radiographs, were used to determine the position of the impacted canine by parallaxing technique for patients having canine impaction. All radiographs were placed on a viewing screen and the area surrounding the radiographs was shielded with a dark material to block interfering lateral light and improve viewing contrast. All radiographs were assessed by two experienced investigators.

The inclusion criteria

Age of above 15 years

Both genders

Pakistani nationality

Exclusion criteria

Any disease, trauma or fracture of the jaw that might have affected the normal growth of perma- nent dentition.

Possessing many impacted teeth and, thus, possibly implying the presence of a syndrome e.g. Down's syndrome or cleidocranial dysostosis.

Exhibiting cases with a definite obstacle, like odontomas or supernumerary teeth.

Data were processed in SPSS version 16.0. The chi-squared test was used to reveal any differences in the distribution of impacted maxillary canines when stratified by gender and location (left or right). A p-value of less than 0.05 was accepted as statistically significant.

RESULTS

Out of 500 patients examined 20(4%) had maxil- lary canine impaction. The mean age was 19.053.15 years. Age was ranged from 15 to 25 years. Female to male ratio was 1.85:1. Females had more impaction of maxillary canine than males. (Table 1) Palatal were the most common in males while buccal were in females. Table 2. Left side was commonly involved in impaction in both genders. (Table 3)

TABLE 1: DISTRIBUTION OF MAXILLARY CA- NINE IMPACTION ACCORDING TO GENDER

Gender###N###n###%age###p-value###2

Male###200###7###1.40

Female###300###13###2.60###0.000###5.684

Total###500###20.0###4.0

TABLE 2: PATTERNS OF MAXILLARY CANINE IMPACTION

###Pattern of impaction

Gender###Buccal###Palatal###Buccopalatal

Male###2(10%)###5(20%)###0(0%)

Female###6(30%)###4(20%)###3(15%)

Total###8(40%)###9(45%)###3(15%)

P-value###0.444###0.035###0.168

2###0.586###4.432###1.90

TABLE 3: DISTRIBUTION OF MAXILLARY CANINE IMPACTION ACCORDING TO SIDE

###Pattern of impaction

Gender###Unilater-###Right###Buccopalatal

###al Left

Male###2(10%)###0(0%)###5(20%)

Female###6(30%)###4(20%)###3(15%)

Total###8(40%)###4(20%)###8(40%)

P-value###0.069###0.035###0.035

2###5.348###4.432###4.432

DISCUSSION

Besides third molars, the impaction of maxillary canines is the most common eruption disturbance in permanent dentition. There has been a long history of research on this subject. Through this research, the general tendencies of maxillary canine impaction have been repeatedly proven by many researchers.6,7 The most representative tendency would be a prevalence for impaction that is greater in females and greater on the palatal side.16 Comparison of the results from this study with those reported previously is complex because of differences in sample size, grouping methods, clinical examination methods, and the radiographic techniques used to make the diagnosis.

Numerous studies17-19 have been conducted to inves- tigate the incidence and prevalence of impacted max- illary canines in different populations. The prevalence of maxillary canine impaction appears to vary within a range of 0.9-3.5%, depending on the population exam- ined. In this study, the overall incidence of impacted maxillary canines was 4%, suggesting that ethnicity and geographic location have influence on the incidence of maxillary canine impaction. Female patients have been reported to be more commonly affected19,20 and current results support this conclusion. It is possible that this higher frequency in female patients is associated with the smaller cranium in female patients, which may lead to diminution of the facial skeleton21 and the jaws.

This would be expected to increase the probability of maxillary canine impaction. Other authors19,21 have hypothesized that the higher female incidence may simply reflect a trend whereby female patients are more likely to seek orthodontic treatment and thus have their impacted canines discovered.

Sridharan et al22 conducted a study to determine the prevalence of impacted maxillary canine in 14069 patients by intraoral examination, palpation, dental records and followed by radiographs. It was found that the prevalence of canine impaction was 2.6% in males and 3.6% in females suggesting that prevalence of impacted maxillary canines is more in females than males and it was statistically significant. The overall prevalence for maxillary impacted canines was found to be 3% which are comparable to the current study. The small dissimilarities may be attributed to the sample selection, method of the study and area of patient se- lection, which suggest racial and genetic differences.

Ericson23 in his study has found that the rate of impacted maxillary canines was in the range of 0.9-2%.8

One more study by Stewart showed that the prevalence of impacted canine was in the range of 1-3%, and it was also found that impaction of maxillary canines have 10 times more prevalence than the mandibular canines.

Ali Gashi et al25 investigated the incidence of impacted maxillary canines in a Kosovar population using the records of 8101 patients. The chi-squared test was used to examine potential differences in the distribution of impacted maxillary canines stratiied by gender, age, location (let or right), and position. It was found that the incidence of impacted maxillary canines was 1.62%. There was statistically significant difference among gender. Ages were in the range of 9 to greater than 20 years, with a mean age of 24.38 8.09 years. Of these subjects, 99 (75.57%) had unilaterally impacted maxillary canines, while 32 (24.43%) had bilateral im- pactions, a statistically significant difference. Impacted canines in 92 subjects (70.2%) were palatally placed, and 18 (13.7%) were labially placed. In the current although the sample size was much smaller than Ali Ghashi the overall prevalence was greater (4%) which indicates ethnic differences.

In this we select age range from 15 years and above to make sure the fully eruption of canine which is not impacted (eruption time 11-13 years in maxilla).

CONCLUSION

The prevalence of maxillary impacted canine was 4% which is higher than previous studies.

REFERENCES

1 Ericson S, Kurol J. Resorption of incisors after ectopic eruption of maxillary canines: a CT study. Angle Orthod 2000; 70: 415-23.

2 Kitan A, Kara S, Akgnulu F, Malko S. The incidence of canine transmigration and tooth impaction in a Turkish subpopulation Eur J Orthod 2010; 32 (5): 575-81.

3 Aydin U, Yilmaz H H, Yildirim D. Incidence of canine impaction and transmigration in a patient population. J Dentomaxfac Radiol 2004; 33: 164-69.

4 Gunduz K, Acikgoz A, Egrioglu E. Radiographic investigation of prevalence associated pathologies and dental anomalies of the no-third molar impacted teeth in Turkish oral patient. Chinese J of Dental Research 2011; 14(2): 141-46.

5 Becker A, Chaushu S. Success rate and duration of orthodontic treatment for adult patients with palatally impacted maxillary canines. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2003; 124: 509-14.

6 Rui H, Liang K, Kaijin H. Investigation of impacted permanent teeth except the third molar in Chinese patients through an x-ray study. J Oral Maxfacl Surg 2010; 68: 762-67.

7 Mevlut C, Hasan K, Husamettin O. Investigation of transmi- grated and impacted maxillary and mandibular canine teeth in an orthodontic patient population. J Oral Maxfacl Surg 2010; 68: 1001-06.

8 Litsas G, Acar A. A review of early displaced maxillary canines:etiology, diagnosis and interceptive treatment.Open Dent J.2011; 5: 39-47.

9 Bedoya MM, Park JH. A review of the diagnosis and manage- ment of impacted maxillary canines. J Am Dent Assoc 2009; 140: 1485-93.

10 Mesotten K, Naert I, van Steen berghe D, Willems G. Bilater- ally impacted maxillary canines and multiple missing teeth: a challenging adult case. Orthod Craniofac Res 2005; 8(1): 29-40.

11 Ericson S, Bjerklin K, Falahat B. Does the canine dental follicle cause resorption of permanent incisor roots A computed tomo- graphic study of erupting maxillary canines. Angle Orthodontist 2002; 72: 95-104.

12 Becker A, Smith P, Behar R . The incidence of anomalous max- illary lateral incisors in relation to palatally-displaced cuspids. Angle Orthodontist 1981; 51: 24-29.

13 Fournier A, Turcotte J, Bernard C. Orthodontic considerations in treatment of maxillary impacted canines. Amer J Orthod 1982; 81: 236-39.

14 Stellzig A, Basdra EK, Kourposch G. The etiology of canine tooth impaction: a space analysis. Angle Orthodontist 1994; 55: 97-103.

15 Oliver RG, Mannion JE, Robinson JM. Morphology of the maxillary lateral incisor in cases of unilateral impaction of the maxillary canine. Br J Orthod 1989; 16: 9-16.

16 Kim Y, Hyun HM, Jang KT. The position of maxillary canine impactions and the influenced factors to adjacent root resorption in the Korean population. Eur J Orthod 2011; 145: 1-5.

17 Aydin H, Yilmaz H, Yildirim D. Incidence of canine impaction and transmigration in a patient population. Dentomaxfac Radiol 2004; 33(3): 164-69.

18. Chu FCS, Li TK, Lui KB, Newsome RP, et al. Prevalence of impacted teeth and associated pathologies " a radiographic study of the Hong Kong Chinese population. Hong Kong Medic J 2003; 9(3): 158-63.

19 Aktan AM, Kara S, KG FA, et al. The incidence of canine trans- migration and tooth impaction in a Turkish subpopulation. Eur J Orthod 2010; 32(5): 575-81.

20 Walker L, Enciso LR, Mah J. Three-dimensional localization of maxillary canines with cone-beam computed tomography," Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 2005; 128(4): 418-23.

21 Cooke J, Wang HL. Canine impactions: incidence and manage- ment," Int JPeriodont Restorat Dent 2006; 26(5): 483-91.

22 Sridharan K, Srinivasa H, Madhukar S, Sandbhor S. Prev- alence of Impacted Maxillary Canines in Patients Attending Out Patient Department of Sri Siddhartha Dental College and Hospital of Sri Siddhartha University, Tumkur, Karnataka. J Dent Sci Research 2010; 1(2): 109-17.

23 Ericson S, Kurol J. Resorption of maxillary lateral incisors caused by ectopic eruption of the canines. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1988; 94: 503-13.

24 Stewart JA, Heo G, Glover KE, et al. Factors that relate to treat- ment duration for patients with palatally impacted maxillary canines. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2001; 119: 216-25.

25 Ali G, Kamberi B, Ademi-Abdyli R, et al. The Incidence of Impacted Maxillary Canines in a Kosovar Population. J Intl Scholar Research 2014; 130(1): 1-4.
COPYRIGHT 2015 Asianet-Pakistan
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2015 Gale, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Publication:Pakistan Oral and Dental Journal
Article Type:Report
Geographic Code:9PAKI
Date:Mar 31, 2015
Words:2540
Previous Article:MISSING TEETH AMONG SCHOOL GOING CHILDREN IN A PESHAWAR SAMPLE.
Next Article:COMPARISON OF LIP THICKNESS AMONG DIFFERENT SKELETAL MALOCCLUSION CLASSES.
Topics:

Terms of use | Privacy policy | Copyright © 2019 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters