Relationship Between Mandibular Symphysis Dimensions and Mandibular Anterior Alveolar Bone Thickness As Assessed with Cone-beam Computed Tomography

Overview

Journal Dental Press J Orthod

Specialty Dentistry

Date 2018 May 24

PMID 29791685

Citations 8

Authors

Pimchanok Foosiri

Korapin Mahatumarat

Soontra Panmekiate

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Objective: To determine the relationship between symphysis dimensions and alveolar bone thickness (ABT) of the mandibular anterior teeth.

Methods: Cone-beam computed tomography images of 51 patients were collected and measured. The buccal and lingual ABT of the mandibular anterior teeth was measured at 3 and 6 mm apical to the cemento-enamel junction (CEJ) and at the root apices. The symphysis height and width were measured. The symphysis ratio was the ratio of symphysis height to symphysis width. Kendall's tau correlation coefficient was used to determine the relationships between the variables at a 0.05 significance level.

Results: The mandibular anterior teeth lingual and apical ABT positively correlated with symphysis width (p<0.05). Moreover, these thicknesses negatively correlated with the symphysis ratio (p<0.05). Symphysis widths and ratios showed higher correlation coefficients with total and buccal apical ABT, compared with lingual ABT. Buccal ABT at 3 and 6 mm apical to the CEJ was not significantly correlated with most symphysis dimensions. The mean thickness of the buccal alveolar bone at the upper root half was only 0.2-0.6 mm, which was very thin, when compared with other regions.

Conclusion: For mandibular anterior teeth, the apical alveolar bone and lingual alveolar bone tended to be thicker in patients with a wide and short symphysis, compared to those with a narrow and long symphysis. Buccal alveolar bone was, in general, very thin and did not show a significant relationship with most symphysis dimensions.

Citing Articles

Movement of Mandibular Incisors in Patients With Skeletal Class III During the Surgical Orthodontic Treatment.

Iijima Y, Tachiki C, Ariizumi D, Yamamoto M, Takaki T, Watanabe A Cureus. 2025; 17(1):e77588.

PMID: 39958006 PMC: 11830394. DOI: 10.7759/cureus.77588.

Immediate implant placement in the anterior mandible: a cone beam computed tomography study.

Kanewoff E, Alhallak R, de Carvalho Machado V, Chrcanovic B BMC Oral Health. 2024; 24(1):393.

PMID: 38539122 PMC: 10976817. DOI: 10.1186/s12903-024-04111-1.

The Accuracy of Lateral Cephalogram for Measuring Alveolar Bone Thickness and Root Diameter on Mandibular Incisors.

Limsakul T, Chanmanee P, Charoemratrote C Diagnostics (Basel). 2022; 12(12).

PMID: 36553166 PMC: 9777406. DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics12123159.

Symphysis morphology and mandibular alveolar bone thickness in patients with β-thalassemia major and different growth patterns.

Khojastepour L, Naderi A, Akbarizadeh F, Movahhedian N, Ahrari F Dental Press J Orthod. 2022; 27(2):e22205.

PMID: 35613245 PMC: 9128807. DOI: 10.1590/2177-6709.27.2.e22205.oar.

Buccal Bone Thickness in Anterior and Posterior Teeth-A Systematic Review.

Heimes D, Schiegnitz E, Kuchen R, Kammerer P, Al-Nawas B Healthcare (Basel). 2021; 9(12).

PMID: 34946389 PMC: 8700878. DOI: 10.3390/healthcare9121663.

References

Nauert K, Berg R . Evaluation of labio-lingual bony support of lower incisors in orthodontically untreated adults with the help of computed tomography. J Orofac Orthop. 1999; 60(5):321-34. DOI: 10.1007/BF01301245. View

Enhos S, Uysal T, Yagci A, Veli I, Ucar F, Ozer T . Dehiscence and fenestration in patients with different vertical growth patterns assessed with cone-beam computed tomography. Angle Orthod. 2012; 82(5):868-74. PMC: 8823119. DOI: 10.2319/111211-702.1. View

Beaty N, Le T . Mandibular thickness measurements in young dentate adults. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2009; 135(9):920-3. DOI: 10.1001/archoto.2009.109. View

Wainwright W . Faciolingual tooth movement: its influence on the root and cortical plate. Am J Orthod. 1973; 64(3):278-302. DOI: 10.1016/0002-9416(73)90021-3. View

Vardimon A, Oren E, Ben-Bassat Y . Cortical bone remodeling/tooth movement ratio during maxillary incisor retraction with tip versus torque movements. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1998; 114(5):520-9. DOI: 10.1016/s0889-5406(98)70172-6. View

HANDELMAN C . The anterior alveolus: its importance in limiting orthodontic treatment and its influence on the occurrence of iatrogenic sequelae. Angle Orthod. 1996; 66(2):95-109; discussion 109-10. DOI: 10.1043/0003-3219(1996)066<0095:TAAIII>2.3.CO;2. View

Wehrbein H, BAUER W, Diedrich P . Mandibular incisors, alveolar bone, and symphysis after orthodontic treatment. A retrospective study. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1996; 110(3):239-46. DOI: 10.1016/s0889-5406(96)80006-0. View

Al-Masri M, Ajaj M, Hajeer M, Al-Eed M . Evaluation of Bone Thickness and Density in the Lower Incisors' Region in Adults with Different Types of Skeletal Malocclusion using Cone-beam Computed Tomography. J Contemp Dent Pract. 2015; 16(8):630-7. DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-1733. View

Lagravere M, Carey J, Toogood R, Major P . Three-dimensional accuracy of measurements made with software on cone-beam computed tomography images. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2008; 134(1):112-6. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2006.08.024. View

10.

Baysal A, Ucar F, Buyuk S, Ozer T, Uysal T . 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):134-40. PMC: 3694205. DOI: 10.4041/kjod.2013.43.3.134. View

11.

Ponraj R, Korath V, Nagachandran , Vijayalakshmi D, Parameswaran R, Raman P . Relationship of Anterior Alveolar Dimensions with Mandibular Divergence in Class I Malocclusion - A Cephalometric Study. J Clin Diagn Res. 2016; 10(5):ZC29-33. PMC: 4948532. DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2016/18973.7743. View

12.

Sarikaya S, Haydar B, Ciger S, Ariyurek M . Changes in alveolar bone thickness due to retraction of anterior teeth. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2002; 122(1):15-26. DOI: 10.1067/mod.2002.119804. View

13.

Gracco A, Luca L, Bongiorno M, Siciliani G . Computed tomography evaluation of mandibular incisor bony support in untreated patients. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2010; 138(2):179-87. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2008.09.030. View

14.

Suri S, Ross R, Tompson B . Mandibular morphology and growth with and without hypodontia in subjects with Pierre Robin sequence. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2006; 130(1):37-46. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2005.09.026. View

15.

Adams G, Gansky S, Miller A, Harrell Jr W, Hatcher D . Comparison between traditional 2-dimensional cephalometry and a 3-dimensional approach on human dry skulls. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2004; 126(4):397-409. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2004.03.023. View

16.

Hoang N, Nelson G, Hatcher D, Oberoi S . Evaluation of mandibular anterior alveolus in different skeletal patterns. Prog Orthod. 2016; 17(1):22. PMC: 4954804. DOI: 10.1186/s40510-016-0135-z. View

17.

Timock A, Cook V, McDonald T, Leo M, Crowe J, Benninger B . Accuracy and reliability of buccal bone height and thickness measurements from cone-beam computed tomography imaging. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2011; 140(5):734-44. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2011.06.021. View

18.

Evangelista K, Vasconcelos K, Bumann A, Hirsch E, Nitka M, Silva M . 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):133.e1-7. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2010.02.021. View

19.

Molina-Berlanga N, Llopis-Perez J, Flores-Mir C, Puigdollers A . Lower incisor dentoalveolar compensation and symphysis dimensions among Class I and III malocclusion patients with different facial vertical skeletal patterns. Angle Orthod. 2013; 83(6):948-55. PMC: 8722832. DOI: 10.2319/011913-48.1. View