A CBCT study of buccolingual tooth inclination and periodontal hard tissue features in subjects with posterior scissors-bite

沈琳慧,许天民,马慧雨,周彦秋
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.cn115797-20190910-20205
2020-01-01
Abstract:Objective:By using CBCT to measure buccolingual tooth inclination and alveolar bone thickness, and by comparing scissors-bite posterior teeth with normal posterior teeth, this study was in the purpose of exploring the tooth location within alveolar bone and the characteristics in periodontal hard tissue in subjects with posterior scissors-bite.Methods:CBCT images of 30 patients (6 males; 24 females; 25±7.6 years old) with posterior scissors bite and 30 patients (4 males; 26 females; 24±6.4 years old) with normal occlusion in posterior teeth were collected.12 pairs of opposing premolars (24 teeth), 12 pairs of opposing first molars (24 teeth) and 39 pairs of opposing second molars(78 teeth) were included in scissors-bite group. 120 pairs of opposing premolars (240 teeth), 60 pairs of opposing first molars (120 teeth) and 60 pairs of opposing second molars (120 teeth) were included in control group. CBCT images were analyzed by Dolphin Imaging software to measure the position of the root within alveolar bone, the buccolingual tooth inclination, the thickness of alveolar bone, and the thickness of the apical bone. The control sample were randomly selected from the control groups to match the sample number in the test group.Results:According to the position of the root in alveolar bone, the chi-square test showed that there were no statistically significant between scissors-bite group and control group. The torque angle of premolar and second molar in scissors-bite group were smaller than that in control group, statistically significant ( P<0.05). The long-axis angle in premolar, first molar and second molar scissors-bite group were statistically significant compared with control group ( P<0.05). The thickness of buccal alveolar bone in premolar in scissors-bite group was smaller than that in control group in maxilla and was larger than that in control group in mandible. In first molar group, the thickness of buccal alveolar bone at the level of 6 mm and 8 mm apically to the CEJ were significantly different from that of control group ( P<0.05). In second molar group, the thickness of buccal alveolar bone at the level of 4 mm in maxilla and 6 mm in mandible were significantly different from that of the control group ( P<0.05). Except for maxillary premolars, mandibular premolar, first molars and second molars showed statistically significance in apical bone thickness between scissors-bite group and control group ( P<0.05). Conclusions:Posterior scissors-bite may be the result of a combination of buccal tipping movements and bodily movements. Periodontal risk of second molar with scissors-bite may be higher than that of premolars and first molar; the posterior periodontal risk is higher in mandible than in maxilla.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?