Search

Introduction: The aim of our study was to evaluate the craniofacial characteristics of children with mild hypodontia using conventional and principal component (PC) analysis., Methods: We used radiographic images of 124 children (8-12 years old) with up to 4 missing teeth (55 boys, 69 girls) and of 676 reference children (365 boys, 311 girls) from the Rotterdam Generation R Study and the Nijmegen Growth Study in The Netherlands. Fifteen cephalometric measurements of children with hypodontia were compared with those of the reference children. Moreover, cephalometric parameters were combined into standardized PC scores using PC analysis, and the components were compared between the 2 groups., Results: PC analysis showed common dental characteristics for all types of hypodontia: a significant increase of the interincisal angle, and decreases of the maxillary and mandibular incisor angles. Other findings were consistent when both methods were applied: (1) anterior hypodontia was significantly associated with the high-angle (hyperdivergent) craniofacial pattern, (2) the tendency toward a Class III malocclusion was identified in maxillary hypodontia, and (3) we observed a significant reduction of lower posterior facial height in children with posterior and mandibular hypodontia., Conclusions: Our findings suggest that children with mild hypodontia have distinctive skeletal and dental features., (Copyright © 2016 American Association of Orthodontists. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The authors conducted a systematic review of cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) applications in orthodontics and evaluated the level of evidence to determine whether the use of CBCT is justified in orthodontics., Types of Studies Reviewed: The authors identified articles by searching the Cochrane Library, PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature databases. They searched the articles' reference lists manually for additional articles and had no language limitations. They did not search the gray literature. Inclusion criteria were CBCT use in orthodontics and that the participants be human. The lowest level of evidence accepted for inclusion was a case series with five or more participants. The authors evaluated the studies' methodological quality according to 13 criteria related to study design, measurements and statistical analysis., Results: The authors identified 550 articles, and 50 met the inclusion criteria. Study topics included temporary anchorage devices, cephalometry, combined orthodontic and surgical treatment, airway measurements, root resorption and tooth impactions, and cleft lip and palate. The methodological quality averaged 53 percent (range, 15-77 percent) of the maximum score., Clinical Implications: The authors found no high-quality evidence regarding the benefits of CBCT use in orthodontics. Limited evidence shows that CBCT offers better diagnostic potential, leads to better treatment planning or results in better treatment outcome than do conventional imaging modalities. Only the results of studies on airway diagnostics provided sound scientific data suggesting that CBCT use has added value. The additional radiation exposure should be weighed against possible benefits of CBCT, which have not been supported in the literature. In future studies, investigators should evaluate the effects of CBCT on treatment procedures, progression and outcome quantitatively.

Background: The authors conducted a literature review to assess whether there is a reduction of salivation with the use of antisialogogues, whether the use of antisialogogues reduces the chair time needed for dental procedures and whether the use of antisialogogues reduces bond failure in orthodontics., Methods: The authors conducted a search for original articles published from 1950 to April 2010 by using the following databases: Cochrane Collaboration, PubMed, Scopus, EMBASE and ISI Web of Knowledge. They included in their review only human studies in which antisialogogues were used. They validated methodological quality and evidence grade., Results: Twenty-six studies met the inclusion criteria. Twenty-five of these studies were related to the effect of antisialogogues on salivation, and one study to bond failure. The authors found that there is evidence that antisialogogues work, inconclusive evidence that they reduce bond failure, and no evidence that they reduce chair time for dental procedures., Clinical Implications: Taking into account the systemic effects of antisialogogues, which exceed the time needed for bracket bonding, the use of antisialogogues for dental procedures in general is questionable.