The Collum angle of the maxillary central incisors in patients with different types of malocclusion

Are morphological and morphometric characteristics of maxillary anterior region and nasopalatine canal related to each other?

OBJECTIVES

The main purpose of this article was to clarify the relationship of anterior bone and tooth morphology with NPC. The anatomical features of the NPC region in three dimensions from coronal, axial, and sagittal directions were analyzed using CBCT and the effects of age, gender, sagittal root positions (SRPs) of central teeth, anterior overbite depth (AOD), central incisor (CI)/palatal plane (PP) angle, NPC/PP angle, and collum angles (CA) on NPC were evaluated in a group of the Turkish population.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this retrospective study, CBCTs of a total of 330 individuals between the ages of 17 and 82 were evaluated. The effects of SRP, AOD, CI/PP angle, NPC/PP angle and CA on the anatomical features of NPC were examined on the basis of age and gender. Descriptive statistics, Kolmogorov-Smirnov, Chi-square, Wilcoxon, Mann-Whitney-U, Kruskal-Wallis, and Spearman correlation tests were used. p values of < 0.05 were accepted as statistically significant.

RESULTS

While the SRPs, CI/PP angle, NPC/PP angle, CA, and age did not differ statistically according to NPC shape (p > 0.05), NPC shape varied according to gender and AOD (p < 0.05). It was found that cylindrical NPC (32.8%) was more common in females, while conical-shaped NPC (30.7%) was more common in males (p < 0.01). While most conical NPC was detected in individuals with Class I overbite depth, cylindrical NPCs were found in Class II and III individuals (p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

The results showed that gender and AOD are influential factors on NPC shape. While conical-shaped NPC is more common in individuals with bite depth incisal, cylindrical-shaped NPC is more likely to be seen in individuals with middle and cervical thirds.

Cone Beam Computerized Tomographic Analysis of Collum Angle of the Maxillary Central Incisors in Different Types of Malocclusion: Comparative Assessment in Saudi, Jordan and Egypt Subpopulation

Background: The collum angle (CA) is an extremely significant for patients who are undergoing orthodontic, dental implant restoration, prosthodontic and periodontic treatments. Aim and Objectives: To determine and compare the mean CA for maxillary central incisor in different types of malocclusion utilizing 3D Cone Beam Computerized Tomography (CBCT) images. The additional objectives were to determine and compare the mean CA for maxillary central incisor based upon the demographic characteristics among Saudi, Jordan and Egypt subpopulation and to test for significant differences in the CA of maxillary central incisor with different molar malocclusions. Methodology: A total of 400 CBCT images were included from the radiology archive at the College of Dentistry, Jouf University (Sakaka, Saudi Arabia). The CBCT images were divided into four groups based upon molar classifications. The selected records were used for the measurement of CA of maxillary central incisor using the measurement tool built into 3D:OnDemand software. Statistical analysis was done using independent t test and ANOVA to examine the differences between gender and races. Results: The mean CA for Class II div 2 exhibited significantly higher crown-root variation as compared other groups (p < 0.0001). Males sample showed greater value of CA for each group as compared to the females and this difference was statistically significant for all the groups other than for Class I (p < 0.05). The post hoc pairwise comparisons between the races showed statistically insignificant findings (p > 0.05). Significant difference was found on pairwise comparisons among different malocclusion groups other than for group Class I/Class II div 1 (p < 0.05). Conclusion: The CA of Class II div 2 group was the greatest as compared to other malocclusion groups. Males sample showed greater value of CA for each group as compared to the females and this difference was statistically significant for all the groups other than for Class I. Statistically insignificant difference was noted for the mean CA among different races whereas significant difference was found on pairwise comparisons among different malocclusion groups other than for group Class I/Class II div 1.

Collum angle of the anterior teeth: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

To assess and evaluate the collum angle (CA) of the anterior teeth of the permanent dentition.

METHODS

A search in seven databases for articles that had measured the CA in sagittal malocclusions was conducted until November 30, 2021. The risk of bias was assessed using the Modified Newcastle Ottawa scale. CA measurements using Cone Beam Computed Tomography or lateral cephalograms were included. The CA data were summarized by random-effects inverse generic meta-analyses.

RESULTS

Qualitative analysis of the 17 selected articles revealed that four were rated as "very good," 12 as "good" and 1 as "satisfactory." CA was 4.7° (95% CI of 3.1 to 6.4) and 2.0° (95% CI of 0.1 to 3.9) greater in Class II division 2 and Class III malocclusions respectively, than in Class I malocclusion cases.

CONCLUSION

Majority of the studies were rated as good or very good. Most studies evaluated the CA of the maxillary central incisors in Class II division 2 malocclusion. Studies assessing other maxillary anterior and mandibular anterior teeth are required.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

Practice of esthetic dentistry for teeth with increased CA is of clinical importance since the angle would determine the longevity and esthetic/cosmetic success of the rehabilitation. Placement of dental implants in areas of missing teeth with increased collum angle leads to excessive stress between the fixture and abutment leading to gingival recession. Thus, knowledge about the collum angle of anterior teeth and its variations in sagittal malocclusions would enable precise treatment planning in the field of esthetic dentistry.

The variation in crown-root morphology of anterior teeth assessed with cone-beam computed tomography

Objective:

To determine the discrepancy of crown-root morphology of anterior teeth, using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT), and to provide a guidance for proper torque expression.

Methods:

A total of eligible 200 CBCT were imported into Invivo v. 5.4 software, to obtain the middle labio-lingual sections of anterior teeth. AutoCAD 2007 software was applied to measure the crown-root angulation (Collum angle) and the angle formed by a tangent to the center of the labial surface and the long axis of the crown (labial surface angle). SPSS 18.0 was used for statistical comparisons of the two measurements, at the level of p< 0.05, and the Pearson correlation analysis was applied to investigate the association between the two measurements.

Results:

The value of Collum angle in maxillary central incisor was close to 0°. Significantly negative Collum angle in lateral incisors and maxillary canine, and positive value in mandibular canine were detected (p < 0.001). The labial surface angle in canine was significantly greater than the intra-arch incisors (p< 0.001), and no significant difference was detected between the central and lateral incisors (p > 0.05). Notably, there was also a significant positive correlation between the two measurements.

Conclusions:

The crown-root angulations were greatly different among anterior teeth. Accompanying the obvious crown-root angulations, the canines both in maxillary and mandibular arches presented considerable labial surface curvatures. Hence, equivalent deviation during bracket bonding might cause greater torque expression error and increase the risk of alveolar fenestration and dehiscence.

Comparison of the collum angle of incisors and canines in skeletal malocclusions - A CBCT study

INTRODUCTION

The collum angle that defines the crown root angulation of the single rooted teeth plays an important in treatment planning.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the collum angle (crown root angulation) of maxillary and mandibular anterior teeth in different skeletal malocclusions using Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Sixty subjects were categorized into four groups (fifteen subjects in each group) Class I, Class II division 1, Class II division 2 malocclusion and Class III based on Angle classification, Wits and ANB. The collum angle of maxillary and mandibular anterior teeth was measured using CBCT. One way ANOVA, Post hoc comparison with Tukey HSD and Paired t-test were used to analyse the measured data.

RESULTS

The collum angle of corresponding right and left side teeth were averaged. Thus, the mean and standard deviation of the collum angle (n-30) were generated for maxillary and mandibular central incisors, lateral incisors, and canines. A statistically significant increase was observed in the maxillary central incisors of Class II division 2 and mandibular lateral incisors of class III malocclusion. The collum angle was increased in mandibular canines of Class III malocclusion when compared with class I and Class II division 2 malocclusion. The collum angle was negative in mandibular central incisors of Class II division 2. No statistically significant difference was observed in the mean collum angle between the right and left side anterior teeth in all the four groups.

CONCLUSION

A variation in Collum angle was observed between the maxillary and mandibular anterior teeth and malocclusions. The effect of these variations in collum angle in torque expression and biomechanics should be kept in mind by the orthodontist before treatment planning especially in Class II division 2 malocclusion.

The crown-root morphology of central incisors in different skeletal malocclusions assessed with cone-beam computed tomography

Background

To determine the discrepancy of crown-root morphology of central incisors among different types of skeletal malocclusion using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) and to provide guidance for proper torque expression of anterior teeth and prevention of alveolar fenestration and dehiscence.

Methods

In this retrospective study, a total of 108 CBCT images were obtained (ranging from 18.0 to 30.0 years, mean age 25.8 years). Patients were grouped according to routine sagittal and vertical skeletal malocclusion classification criteria. The patients in sagittal groups were all average vertical patterns, with Class I comprised 24 patients—14 females and 10 males; Class II comprised 20 patients—13 females and 7 males; and Class III comprised 22 subjects—13 females and 9 males. The patients in vertical groups were all skeletal Class I malocclusions, with low angle comprised 21 patients—12 females and 9 males; average angle comprised 24 patients; and high angle comprised 21 patients—11 females and 10 males. All the CBCT data were imported into Invivo 5.4 software to obtain a middle labio-lingual section of right central incisors. Auto CAD 2007 software was applied to measure the crown-root angulation (Collum angle), and the angle formed by a tangent to the central of the labial surface of the crown and the long axis of the crown (labial surface angle). One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Scheffe’s test were used for statistical comparisons at the P < 0.05 level, and the Pearson correlation analysis was applied to investigate the association between the two measurements.

Results

The values of Collum angle and labial surface angle in maxillary incisor of Class II and mandibular incisor of Class III were significantly greater than other types of sagittal skeletal malocclusions (P < 0.05); no significant difference was detected among vertical skeletal malocclusions. Notably, there was also a significant positive correlation between the two measurements.

Conclusions

The maxillary incisor in patients with sagittal skeletal Class II malocclusion and mandibular incisor with Class III malocclusion present remarkable crown-root angulation and correspondingly considerable labial surface curvature. Equivalent deviation during bracket bonding may cause greater torque expression error and increase the risk of alveolar fenestration and dehiscence.

Coordinating bracket torque and incisor inclination : Part 3: Validity of bracket torque values in achieving norm inclinations

PURPOSE

To analyze common values of bracket torque (Andrews, Roth, MBT, Ricketts) for their validity in achieving incisor inclinations that are considered normal by different cephalometric standards.

METHODS

Using the equations developed in part 1 (eU1_(BOP) = 90° - BT_(U1) - TCA_(U1) + α₁ - α₂ and eL1_(BOP) = 90° - BT_(L1) - TCA_(L1) + β₁ - β₂) (abbreviations see part 1) and the mean values (± SD) obtained as statistical measures in parts 1 and 2 of the study (α₁ and β₁ [1.7° ± 0.7°], α₂ [3.6° ± 0.3°], β₂ [3.2° ± 0.4°], TCA_(U1) [24.6° ± 3.6°] and TCA_(L1) [22.9° ± 4.3°]) expected (= theoretically anticipated) values were calculated for upper and lower incisors (U1 and L1) and compared to targeted (= cephalometric norm) values.

RESULTS

For U1, there was no overlapping between the ranges of expected and targeted values, as the lowest targeted value of (58.3°; Ricketts) was higher than the highest expected value (56.5°; Andrews) relative to the bisected occlusal plane (BOP). Thus all of these torque systems will aim for flatter inclinations than prescribed by any of the norm values. Depending on target values, the various bracket systems fell short by 1.8-5.5° (Andrews), 6.8-10.5° (Roth), 11.8-15.5° (MBT), or 16.8-20.5° (Ricketts). For L1, there was good agreement of the MBT system with the Ricketts and Björk target values (Δ0.1° and Δ-0.8°, respectively), and both the Roth and Ricketts systems came close to the Bergen target value (both Δ2.3°). Depending on target values, the ranges of deviation for L1 were 6.3-13.2° for Andrews (Class II prescription), 2.3°-9.2° for Roth, -3.7 to -3.2° for MBT, and 2.3-9.2° for Ricketts.

CONCLUSIONS

Common values of upper incisor bracket torque do not have acceptable validity in achieving normal incisor inclinations. A careful selection of lower bracket torque may provide satisfactory matching with some of the targeted norm values.

Coordinating bracket torque and incisor inclination : Part 2: Reproducibility and statistical measures of the torque coordination angle (TCA)

PURPOSE

To determine the reproducibility and statistical measures of the torque coordination angle (TCA).

METHODS

A total of 107 final cephalograms and corresponding casts were included, all reflecting treatment outcomes that met high qualitative standards, one of them being a Peer Assessment Rating (PAR) score of ≤3. Based on these records, the TCA was measured as a parameter to identify differences related to tooth morphology and bracket position between the torque-relevant reference plane at the bracket base and the long axis of a tooth. All measurements were performed on upper and lower central incisors (U1 and L1).

RESULTS

Several reproducibility assessments for the TCA measurements yielded good results, including objectivity at 1.26 ± 0.81° (U1) or 1.41 ± 1.18° (L1), examiner reliability at 1.30 ± 0.97° (U1) or 1.25 ± 0.82° (L1), and method reliability at 1.80 ± 1.13° (U1) or 1.53 ± 1.07° (L1). The statistical measures revealed a high degree of interindividual variability. With bracket placement 4.5 mm (U1) or 4.0 mm (L1) above the incisal edge, the differences between the maximum and minimum TCA values were similarly large in both jaws (21.0° for U1 or 20.0° for L1), given mean TCA values of 24.6 ± 3.6° (U1) or 22.9 ± 4.3° (L1). Moving the bracket placement from 3.5 to 5.5 mm (U1) or from 3.0 to 5.0 mm (L1) changed the mean TCA values by 4.5° (U1) or 3.2° (L1).

CONCLUSIONS

The TCA is a suitable cephalometric parameter to identify differences related to tooth morphology and bracket placement. Given its high interindividual variability, the fixed torque value of a specific bracket system should not be expected to produce the same incisor inclinations across patients.