Agenesis of Maxillary Lateral Incisors: Treatment Involves Much More Than Just Canine Guidance

A Multidisciplinary Approach to Maxillary Lateral Incisor Agenesis (MLIA): A Case Report

Maxillary lateral incisor agenesis (MLIA) is a condition that significantly compromises smile esthetics and is a particular concern in younger patients. The treatment options include orthodontics for space opening with rehabilitation or space closure with canine camouflage. Currently, there is some controversy regarding the most appropriate treatment. In this case report, we propose a multidisciplinary approach through the combination of orthodontic treatment, frenectomy, and a restorative finishing stage with composite resin and dental implants. More specifically, this treatment was planned to orthodontically close the anterior space by opening the premolar area for subsequent placement of implants and enameloplasty with a composite resin. The replacement of a missing lateral incisor by an implant is a predictable treatment approach, but it might best be deferred until dental maturity and then accurately placed in a well-developed site through a multidisciplinary approach. Precluding the closure of the anterior spaces and the opening of the posterior zone for implant placement, allows for a more stable and appealing esthetic and functional rehabilitation for young patients, in whom esthetic appearance and self-esteem play a primary role.

Agenesis of maxillary lateral incisors: diagnosis and treatment options

Introduction:

There are different possibilities of orthodontic planning for cases with congenital absence of maxillary lateral incisors. This subject divides the opinion of orthodontists and oral rehabilitation clinicians, due to the advantages and disadvantages of each treatment option, which may involve opening spaces for future implants and/or prosthetic restorations, or closing the spaces by positioning the maxillary canines in the place of lateral incisors. The correct diagnosis and careful evaluation of each patient allow to determine the best therapeutic approach. This paper discusses the main topics to be considered when planning these cases.

Objectives:

To evaluate the main aspects related to orthodontic treatment planning in cases of congenital absence of maxillary lateral incisors, to aid the decision-making, with clinical and scientific basis.

Canine substitution of congenitally missing maxillary lateral incisors in Class I and Class III malocclusions by using skeletal anchorage

INTRODUCTION

This prospective cohort study aimed to evaluate canine substitution supported by skeletal anchorage as a viable treatment protocol for patients with maxillary lateral incisor agenesis (MLIA) and skeletal Class I or Class III.

METHODS

Patients (n = 30) who met the following criteria were recruited: (1) bilateral MLIA or unilateral MLIA with a riziform contralateral incisor with a planned extraction; (2) skeletal Class I or Class III; and (3) dentoalveolar discrepancy in the mandible <5 mm. The archwire sequence routine was administered, combined with a rapid palatal expander, temporary intraoral skeletal anchorage device, and intermaxillary traction with Class III elastics. The results of the cephalometric analyses, peer assessment rating indexes, and the patient's smile self-evaluation using the visual analog scale were compared between initial and final treatments.

RESULTS

This study indicated that closing the space in patients with Class I or Class III malocclusion by using temporary intraoral skeletal anchorage devices in the mandible, along with Class III elastics, yielded satisfactory outcomes. Proper occlusion was established by mesialization of the maxillary teeth and correction of the intermaxillary discrepancy, thereby yielding beneficial and significant cephalometric changes after the treatment. The soft tissue profile was maintained when it was harmonious before the treatment and improved posttreatment in patients in whom the profile was initially inharmonious. All occlusions improved, as evidenced by the peer assessment rating index. Smile esthetics were also enhanced after orthodontic treatment for all patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Canine substitution may be safely offered to patients with Class I and Class III skeletal pattern and MLIA.