Root changes in buccal versus palatal maxillary impacted canines of adults: A longitudinal and retrospective 3-dimensional study before and after orthodontic traction

Three-dimensional changes in root angulation of buccal versus palatal maxillary impacted canines after orthodontic traction: A retrospective before and after study

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this study was to three-dimensionally compare the root angulation changes after orthodontic traction of buccally versus palatally maxillary impacted canines (MICs).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This retrospective study included patients from a private dental office of both sexes, older than 12 years, with at least one unilateral or bilateral buccal or palatal MIC, no loss of permanent teeth, with complete apical closure at the beginning of traction, and with CBCTs taken at pretreatment (T₀) and after orthodontic traction (T₁). The sample was divided in two groups according to their impaction site: buccal versus palatal. In all the scans, the MIC was segmented and the root angulation changes after traction were evaluated. The assessment included the sigma angle (projected on the XZ plane or coronal tomographic view), the delta angle (projected on the XY plane or axial view) and the epsilon angle (projected on the YZ plane, or sagittal view). Intragroup comparisons were performed with Wilcoxon signed-rank tests. Intergroup comparisons were performed with t-tests or Mann-Whitney U tests. Finally, the influence of MIC characteristics on the measured angles were evaluated with multiple linear regression analyses (α=0.05).

RESULTS

Thirty-three patients (16 men, mean age: 20.38; 17 women, mean age 18.37) with forty-five orthodontically treated MIC (19 buccal versus 26 palatal) were finally included. The palatal MICs showed greater mediolateral uprighting than the buccal MICs, root displacement towards the midsagittal plane, as demonstrated by the sigma angle (palatal group: 37.58±15.08°; buccal group: 29.17±31.15°; P=0.164) and delta (palatal group: -76.90±26.55°; buccal group: -30.56±41.67°; P<0.001)angle changes. The buccal MICs showed greater anteroposterior uprighting, anterior root displacement, as demonstrated by the epsilon angle (palatal group: -4.63±12.37°; buccal group: -25.96±17.79°; P<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Mediolateral and anteroposterior root angulation show significant differences after traction between buccal and palatal MICs. Palatal MICs showed greater medial root displacement while buccal MICs showed greater anterior root displacement. This condition should be considered for better planning of traction and orthodontic finishing.