<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><sec id="j_aoj-2022-0014_s_001"><h3>Objective</h3><p>To identify and determine the relationship between facial, maxillary arch and incisor dimensions of patients presenting with a unilaterally impacted palatal canine.</p></sec><sec id="j_aoj-2022-0014_s_002"><h3>Methods</h3><p>Prospective referrals over one calendar year of patients identified with a unilaterally impacted palatal canine were compared with prospectively recruited control subjects. Canine location was determined radiographically and re-confirmed two weeks later. Facial, maxillary arch and incisor dimensions were assessed. Intra-examiner reproducibility was re-assessed using randomly selected images (20%, <italic>n</italic> = 40). General linear models were applied for inter-group comparisons incorporating Bonferroni adjustment with categorical parameters assessed using Fisher’s exact test (SAS<sup>®</sup>, Version 9.4, SAS.com). Inter-class correlation coefficients were calculated for relationships between the variables.</p></sec><sec id="j_aoj-2022-0014_s_003"><h3>Results</h3><p>Fifty-four patients (37 females; 17 males) presenting with a unilaterally impacted palatal canine [mean age 14.5 (SD 1.7) years] and 54 control subjects (37 females, 17 males) [mean age 14.3 (SD 2.2) years] were recruited. Measurement error was small for landmark data (0.58 mm), palatal depth (0.09 mm), palatal area (0.42 mm²) and Bolton ratio (0.14%). For facial, maxillary arch and tooth shape assessments, landmark error was 0.05 mm with complete agreement for classification.</p><p>The mean nasal basal width was smaller in the unilaterally impacted palatal canine group compared with the control group (<italic>P</italic> &lt; 0.0001) but face shape distribution and face ratio were similar (both <italic>P</italic> > 0.05). The mean anterior Bolton ratio was larger in the impacted canine group (<italic>P</italic> &lt; 0.01). No differences were recorded between groups for other parameters (all <italic>P</italic> > 0.05). No positive correlations were identified between the variables.</p></sec><sec id="j_aoj-2022-0014_s_004"><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Patients with a unilaterally impacted palatal canine had a narrower mean nasal basal width and a larger mean anterior Bolton ratio compared to a control group but the clinical significance of the differences was considered minor. Facial, maxillary arch and incisor dimensions were neither individually nor collectively correlated with a palatal canine which may lend support to a genetic aetiology.</p></sec></abstract>

ObjectiveTo identify and determine the relationship between facial, maxillary arch and incisor dimensions of patients presenting with a unilaterally impacted palatal canine.MethodsProspective referrals over one calendar year of patients identified with a unilaterally impacted palatal canine were compared with prospectively recruited control subjects. Canine location was determined radiographically and re-confirmed two weeks later. Facial, maxillary arch and incisor dimensions were assessed. Intra-examiner reproducibility was re-assessed using randomly selected images (20%, n = 40). General linear models were applied for inter-group comparisons incorporating Bonferroni adjustment with categorical parameters assessed using Fisher’s exact test (SAS®, Version 9.4, SAS.com). Inter-class correlation coefficients were calculated for relationships between the variables.ResultsFifty-four patients (37 females; 17 males) presenting with a unilaterally impacted palatal canine [mean age 14.5 (SD 1.7) years] and 54 control subjects (37 females, 17 males) [mean age 14.3 (SD 2.2) years] were recruited. Measurement error was small for landmark data (0.58 mm), palatal depth (0.09 mm), palatal area (0.42 mm²) and Bolton ratio (0.14%). For facial, maxillary arch and tooth shape assessments, landmark error was 0.05 mm with complete agreement for classification.The mean nasal basal width was smaller in the unilaterally impacted palatal canine group compared with the control group (P < 0.0001) but face shape distribution and face ratio were similar (both P > 0.05). The mean anterior Bolton ratio was larger in the impacted canine group (P < 0.01). No differences were recorded between groups for other parameters (all P > 0.05). No positive correlations were identified between the variables.ConclusionsPatients with a unilaterally impacted palatal canine had a narrower mean nasal basal width and a larger mean anterior Bolton ratio compared to a control group but the clinical significance of the differences was considered minor. Facial, maxillary arch and incisor dimensions were neither individually nor collectively correlated with a palatal canine which may lend support to a genetic aetiology.

Are facial, maxillary arch and incisor dimensions related in patients with a unilaterally impacted palatal canine? A prospective investigation

Australasian Orthodontic Journal

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

left-running-head

KOSHAK, MILLETT, KELLY, MCINTYRE AND CRONIN

right-running-head

Facial, maxillary and incisor dimensions with a unilaterally impacted palatal canine

ObjectiveTo identify and determine the relationship between facial, maxillary arch and incisor dimensions of patients presenting with a unilaterally impacted palatal canine.MethodsProspective referrals over one calendar year of patients identified with a unilaterally impacted palatal canine were compared with prospectively recruited control subjects. Canine location was determined radiographically and re-confirmed two weeks later. Facial, maxillary arch and incisor dimensions were assessed. Intra-examiner reproducibility was re-assessed using randomly selected images (20%, n = 40). General linear models were applied for inter-group comparisons incorporating Bonferroni adjustment with categorical parameters assessed using Fisher’s exact test (SAS®, Version 9.4, SAS.com). Inter-class correlation coefficients were calculated for relationships between the variables.ResultsFifty-four patients (37 females; 17 males) presenting with a unilaterally impacted palatal canine [mean age 14.5 (SD 1.7) years] and 54 control subjects (37 females, 17 males) [mean age 14.3 (SD 2.2) years] were recruited. Measurement error was small for landmark data (0.58 mm), palatal depth (0.09 mm), palatal area (0.42 mm²) and Bolton ratio (0.14%). For facial, maxillary arch and tooth shape assessments, landmark error was 0.05 mm with complete agreement for classification.The mean nasal basal width was smaller in the unilaterally impacted palatal canine group compared with the control group (P  0.05). The mean anterior Bolton ratio was larger in the impacted canine group (P  0.05). No positive correlations were identified between the variables.ConclusionsPatients with a unilaterally impacted palatal canine had a narrower mean nasal basal width and a larger mean anterior Bolton ratio compared to a control group but the clinical significance of the differences was considered minor. Facial, maxillary arch and incisor dimensions were neither individually nor collectively correlated with a palatal canine which may lend support to a genetic aetiology.

ObjectiveTo identify and determine the relationship between facial, maxillary arch and incisor dimensions of patients presenting with a unilaterally impacted...

Are facial, maxillary arch and incisor dimensions related in patients with a unilaterally impacted palatal canine? A prospective investigation

Article Category: research-article

Published Online: Mar 28, 2022

Page range: 120 - 129

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/aoj-2022-0014

© 2022 Lamis K. Koshak et al., published by Sciendo

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.