Investigation of prevalence of dental anomalies by using digital panoramic radiographs

• Autorzy: Bilge N.H. , Yesiltepe S. , Torenek Agırman K. , Caglayan F. , Bilge O.M.
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

Background: This study was performed to evaluate the prevalence of all types and subtypes of dental anomalies among 6- to 40-year-old patients by using panoramic radiographs. Materials and methods: This cross-sectional study was conducted by analysing digital panoramic radiographs of 1200 patients admitted to our clinic in 2014. Dental anomalies were examined under 5 types and 16 subtypes. Dental anomalies were divided into 5 types: (a) number (including hypodontia, oligodontia and hyperdontia); (b) size (including microdontia and macrodontia); (c) structure (including amelogenesis imperfecta, dentinogenesis imperfecta and dentin dysplasia); (d) position (including transposition, ectopia, displacement, impaction and inversion); (e) shape (including fusion-gemination, dilaceration and taurodontism). Results: The prevalence of dental anomalies diagnosed by panoramic radiographs was 39.2% (46% in men and 54% in women). Anomalies of position (60.8%) and shape (27.8%) were the most common types of abnormalities and anomalies of size (8.2%), structure (0.2%) and number (17%) were the least in both genders. Anomalies of impaction (45.5%), dilacerations (16.3%), hypodontia (13.8%) and taurodontism (11.2%) were the most common subtypes of dental anomalies. Taurodontism was more common in the age groups of 13–19 years. The age range of the most frequent of all other anomalies was 20–29. Conclusions: Anomalies of tooth position were the most common type of dental anomalies and structure anomalies were the least common in this Turkish population. The frequency and type of dental anomalies vary within and between populations, confirming the role of racial factors in the prevalence of dental anomalies. Digital panoramic radiography is a very useful method for the detection of dental anomalies. (Folia Morphol 2018; 77, 2: 323–328)

• Wydawca: -
• Czasopismo: Folia Morphologica
• Rocznik: 2018
• Tom: 77
• Numer: 2
• Opis fizyczny: p.323–328,fig.,ref.

Twórcy

autor

Bilge N.H.

• Department of Oral Dental and Maxillofacial Radiology, Faculty of Dentistry, Ataturk University, Erzurum, Turkey

autor

Yesiltepe S.

• Department of Oral Dental and Maxillofacial Radiology, Faculty of Dentistry, Ataturk University, Erzurum, Turkey

autor

Torenek Agırman K.

• Department of Oral Dental and Maxillofacial Radiology, Faculty of Dentistry, Ataturk University, Erzurum, Turkey

autor

Caglayan F.

• Department of Oral Dental and Maxillofacial Radiology, Faculty of Dentistry, Ataturk University, Erzurum, Turkey

autor

Bilge O.M.

• Department of Oral Dental and Maxillofacial Radiology, Faculty of Dentistry, Ataturk University, Erzurum, Turkey

Bibliografia

• 1. Benediktsdottir IS, Hintze H, Petersen JK, et al. Accuracy of digital and film panoramic radiographs for assessment of position and morphology of mandibular third molars and prevalence of dental anomalies and pathologies. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2003; 32(2): 109–115, doi: 10.1259/dmfr/15999089, indexed in Pubmed: 12775665.
• 2. Buenviaje TM, Rapp R. Dental anomalies in children: a clinical and radiographic survey. ASDC J Dent Child. 1984; 51(1): 42–46, indexed in Pubmed: 6583219.
• 3. Collins MA, Mauriello SM, Tyndall DA, et al. Dental anomalies associated with amelogenesis imperfecta: a radiographic assessment. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 1999; 88(3): 358–364, indexed in Pubmed: 10503869.
• 4. Dalili Z, Nemati S, Dolatabadi N, et al. Prevalence of developmental and acquired dental anomalies on digital panoramic radiography in patients attending the dental faculty of rasht, iran. J Dentomaxillofac Radiol Pathol Surg. 2013; 1(2): 24–32, doi: 10.18869/acadpub.3dj.1.2.24.
• 5. Darwazeh AM, Hamasha AA, Pillai K. Prevalence of taurodontism in Jordanian dental patients. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 1998; 27(3): 163–165, doi: 10.1038/sj/dmfr/4600342, indexed in Pubmed: 9693528.
• 6. de Azevedo Pereira AJ FR, Fidel SR. Maxillary lateral incisor with two root canals: Fusion, gemination or dens invaginatus? Brazilian Dental J. 2000; 11: 141–146.
• 7. Ezoddini AF, Sheikhha MH, Ahmadi H. Prevalence of dental developmental anomalies: a radiographic study. Community Dent Health. 2007; 24(3): 140–144, indexed in Pubmed: 17958073.
• 8. Ghabanchi J, Haghnegahdar AA, Khodadazadeh SH, et al. A radiographic and clinical survey of dental anomalies in patients referring to Shiraz dental school. Shiraz Univ Dent J. 2009; 10: 26–31.
• 9. Ghaznawi HI, Daas H, Salako NOA. clinical and radiographic survey of selected dental anomalies and conditions in a Saudi Arabian population. Saudi Dent J. 1999; 11: 8–13.
• 10. Gupta SK, Saxena P, Jain S, et al. Prevalence and distribution of selected developmental dental anomalies in an Indian population. J Oral Sci. 2011; 53(2): 231–238, indexed in Pubmed: 21712629.
• 11. Guttal KS, Naikmasur VG, Bhargava P, et al. Frequency of developmental dental anomalies in the Indian population. Eur J Dent. 2010; 4(3): 263–269, indexed in Pubmed: 20613914.
• 12. Hagman FT. Anomalies of form and number, fused primary teeth, a correlation of the dentitions. ASDC J Dent Child. 1988; 55(5): 359–361, indexed in Pubmed: 3049713.
• 13. Hall C, Hallett K, Manton D. The association between Cri du chat syndrome and dental anomalies. J Dent Child (Chic). 2014; 81(3): 171–177, indexed in Pubmed: 25514263.
• 14. Kenneth M. Goodis, Harold E. Seltzer and Bender’s dental pulp, 2nd ed. Quintessence pub History. 2002; 11(1).
• 15. Jafarzadeh H, Abbott PV. Dilaceration: review of an endodontic challenge. J Endod. 2007; 33(9): 1025–1030, doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2007.04.013, indexed in Pubmed: 17931926.
• 16. Kositbowornchai S, Chutimapom K, Poomat N. Prevalence and distribution of dental anomalies in pretreatment orthodontic Thai patients. Khon Kaen Univ Dent J. 2010; 13: 92–100.
• 17. MacDonald-Jankowski DS, Li TT. Taurodontism in a young adult Chinese population. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 1993; 22(3): 140–144, doi: 10.1259/dmfr.22.3.8299833, indexed in Pubmed: 8299833.
• 18. Marques LS, Alcântara CE, Pereira LJ, et al. Down syndrome: a risk factor for malocclusion severity? Braz Oral Res. 2015; 29: 44, doi: 10.1590/1807-3107BOR-2015. vol29.0044, indexed in Pubmed: 25760064.
• 19. Neville BW, Douglas D, Allen CM, et al. Oral and maxillofacial pathology. 3rd ed. St. Louis: Saunders. 2009.
• 20. Nicholls W. Dental anomalies in children with cleft lip and palate in Western Australia. Eur J Dent. 2016; 10(2): 254–258, doi: 10.4103/1305-7456.178317, indexed in Pubmed: 27095907.
• 21. Saberi EA, Ebrahimipour S. Evaluation of developmental dental anomalies in digital panoramic radiographs in Southeast Iranian Population. J Int Soc Prev Community Dent. 2016; 6(4): 291–295, doi: 10.4103/2231-0762.186804, indexed in Pubmed: 27583215.
• 22. Salem G. Prevalence of selected dental anomalies in Saudi children from Gizan region. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 1989; 17(3): 162–163, indexed in Pubmed: 2786794.
• 23. Sarr M, Toure B, Kane AW, et al. [Taurodontism and the pyramidal tooth at the level of the molar. Prevalence in the Senegalese population 15 to 19 years of age]. Odontostomatol Trop. 2000; 23(89): 31–34, indexed in Pubmed: 11372145.
• 24. Shifman A, Chanannel I. Prevalence of taurodontism found in radiographic dental examination of 1,200 young adult Israeli patients. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 1978; 6(4): 200–203, indexed in Pubmed: 278704.
• 25. Shokri A, Poorolajal J, Khajeh S, et al. Prevalence of dental anomalies among 7- to 35-year-old people in Hamadan, Iran in 2012-2013 as observed using panoramic radiographs. Imaging Sci Dent. 2014; 44(1): 7–13, doi: 10.5624/isd.2014.44.1.7, indexed in Pubmed: 24701453.
• 26. Uslu O, Akcam MO, Evirgen S, et al. Prevalence of dental anomalies in various malocclusions. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2009; 135(3): 328–335, doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2007.03.030, indexed in Pubmed: 19268831.

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.5603/FM.a2017.0087