Advertisement
Research Article| Volume 25, ISSUE 1, P16-23, March 2019

Diagnosis of transverse problems

Published:February 11, 2019DOI:https://doi.org/10.1053/j.sodo.2019.02.003

      Abstract

      Traditionally, maxillary and mandibular skeletal widths and buccolingual inclination of posterior teeth are evaluated by using posteroanterior (PA) cephalogram and dental casts. However, it is difficult to identify the landmarks and make a diagnosis due to the superimposed structures on the PA cephalogram. As for the dental casts, they can neither reveal skeletal dimensions of maxilla and mandible, nor the root positions in the alveolar bone. Nowadays, the advent of CBCT enables clinicians to view craniofacial structures in three planes of space without any obstruction or superimposition of structures. In this article, a CBCT analysis on the transverse dimension is introduced. The maxillary and mandibular skeletal widths at different tooth levels, buccolingual inclination of each tooth, and their root positions in the alveolar bone can be determined. Thus, a proper transverse diagnosis can be made.
      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to Seminars in Orthodontics
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Bjork A
        • Skieller V
        Growth of the maxilla in three dimensions as revealed radiographically by the implant methods.
        British J Orthod. 1977; 4: 53-64
        • Ricketts RM
        • Roth RH
        • Chaconas SJ
        • Schulhof RJ
        • et al.
        Orthodontic Diagnosis and Planning.
        Rocky Mountain Data Systems, Denver1982
        • Ricketts RM
        • Grummons D.
        Frontal cephalometrics: practical applications, part I.
        World J Orthod. 2003; 4: 297-316
        • Cortella S
        • Shofer FS
        • Ghafari J
        Transverse development of the jaws: norms for the posteroanterior cephalometric analysis.
        Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1997; 112: 519-522
        • Wagner D
        • Chung C-H
        Transverse growth of the maxilla and mandible in untreated females with low, average, and high MP-SN angles: a longitudinal study.
        Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2005; 128: 716-723
        • Moyers RE
        • Van der Linden
        • Riolo ML
        • McNamara Jr., JA
        Standards of Human Occlusal Development.
        University of Michigan, Center for Human Growth and Development, Ann Arber, Michigan1976 (Monograph 5, Craniofacial Growth Series)
        • McNamara JA
        • Brudon WL.
        Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics.
        Needham Press, Ann Arbor, Michigan2001
        • Wilson GH
        A Manual of Dental Prosthetics.
        Lea & Febiber, Philadelphia and New York1911
        • Dempster WT
        • Adams WJ
        • Dubbles RA
        Arrangement in the jaws of the roots of the teeth.
        JADA. 1963; 67: 779-797
        • Marshall S
        • Dawson D
        • Southard KA
        • Lee AN
        • et al.
        Transverse molar movements during growth.
        Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2003; 124: 615-624
        • Sayania B
        • Merchant M
        • Josephs P
        • Chung C-H
        Changes in the buccolingual inclination of first molars with growth in untreated subjects: a longitudinal study.
        Angle Orthod. 2017; 87: 681-687
        • Yang B
        • Chung C-H
        Buccolingual inclination of molars in untreated children and adults: a CBCT study.
        Angle Orthod. 2019; 89: 87-92
        • Alkhatib R
        • Chung C-H
        Buccolingual inclination of first molars in untreated adults: a CBCT study.
        Angle Orthod. 2017; 87: 598-602
        • Tong H
        • Kwon D
        • Shi J
        • Sakai N
        • et al.
        Mesiodistal angulation and faciolingual inclination of each whole tooth in 3-dimensional space in patients with near-normal occlusion.
        Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2012; 141: 604-617
        • Kohakura S
        • Kasia K
        • Ohno I
        • Kanazawa E
        Relationship between maxillofacial morphology and morphological characteristics of vertical sections of the mandible obtained by CT scanning.
        J Nihon Univ Sch Dent. 1997; 39: 71-77
        • Janson G
        • Bombonatti R
        • Cruz KS
        • Hassunuma CY
        • et al.
        Buccolingual inclinations of posterior teeth in subjects with different facial patterns.
        Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2004; 125: 316-322
        • Tsunori M
        • Mashita M
        • Kasai K
        Relationship between facial types and tooth and bone characteristics of the mandible obtained by CT scanning.
        Angle Orthod. 1998; 68: 557-562
        • Thilander B
        • Lennartsson B
        A study of children with unilateral posterior crossbite, treated and untreated, in the deciduous dentition: occlusal and skeletal characteristics of significance in predicting long-term outcome.
        J Orofac Orthop. 2002; 63: 371-383
        • Miner RM
        • Al Qabandi S
        • Rigali P
        • Will LA
        Cone-beam computed tomography transverse analysis. Part 1: normative data.
        Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2012; 142: 300-307
        • Vanarsdall R
        Transverse dimension and long-term stability.
        Semin Orthod. 1999; 5: 171-180
        • Allen D
        • Rebellato J
        • Sheats R
        • Ceron AM
        Skeletal and dental contributions to posterior crossbites.
        Angle Orthod. 2003; 73: 515-524
        • Marshall SD
        • Southard KA
        • Southard TE
        Early transverse treatment.
        Semin Orthod. 2005; 11: 130-139
        • Lee K-M
        • Hwang H-S
        • Cho J-H
        Comparison of transverse analysis between posteroanterior cephalogram and cone-beam computed tomography.
        Angle Orthod. 2014; 84: 715-719
        • Miner RM
        • Al Qabandi S
        • Rigali P
        • Will LA
        Cone-beam computed tomography transverse analysis. Part 2: measures of performance.
        Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2015; 148: 253-263
        • Isaacson JR
        • Isaacson RJ
        • Speidel TM
        • Worms FW
        Extreme variation in vertical facial growth and associated variation in skeletal and dental relations.
        Angle Orthod. 1971; 41: 219-229
        • Forster CM
        • Sunga E
        • Chung C-H
        Relationship between dental arch width and vertical facial morphology in untreated adults.
        Eur J Orthod. 2008; 30 (2008): 288-294
        • Andrews LF
        The 6-elements orthodontic philosophy: treatment goals, classification, and rules for Treating.
        Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2015; 148: 883-887
        • Andrews LF
        The six elements of orofacial harmony.
        Andrews J. 2000; 1: 13-22
        • Nanda R
        Biomechanics and Esthetic Strategies in Clinical Orthodontics.
        Elsevier Saunders, St. Louis2005
        • Molen AD
        Considerations in the use of cone-beam computed topography for buccal bone measurements.
        Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2010; 137 (41-50): S130-S135
        • Patcas R
        • Muller L
        • Ullrich O
        • Peltomaki T
        Accuracy of cone-beam computed tomography at different resolutions assessed on the bony covering of the mandibular anterior teeth.
        Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2012; 141: 41-50