Abstract
BackgroundThe aim of the present investigation was to evaluate if an orthodontic population of Class III malocclusion patients shows a different prevalence of maxillary canine impaction than Class I subjects.Material and MethodsFifty-eight subjects were retrospectively selected and assigned to the Class I group (n= 32) or the Class III group (n= 26), depending on the ANB and WITS values. Lateral cephalograms were used to collect angular and linear measurements that described the skeletal and dental maxillary features of the subjects, while orthopantomography was used to assess the impaction or the correct eruption of the maxillary canines. An independent samples T-test or a Mann–Whitney U-test was used to compare the cephalometric values between the two groups, while a chi-squared test was used to evaluate the distribution of maxillary canine impaction between the two groups.ResultsNo statistically significant difference was found for the cephalometric variables, and the frequency of canine impaction showed no difference between the Class III and Class I subjects.ConclusionsPatients with skeletal Class III malocclusions did not show a different prevalence of canine impaction; therefore, such skeletal features cannot be used as a diagnostic aid for assessment of the risk of maxillary canine impaction. Key words:Skeletal Class III, Angle Class III, maxillary canine impaction, tooth impaction.
Highlights
The impaction of maxillary canines is the most frequent eruption pathology after that of mandibular and maxillary third molars, and it is found in almost 2% of the population [1]
The aim of the present investigation was to study if in an orthodontic population, skeletal Class III subjects exhibit a different prevalence of maxillary canine impaction compared to skeletal Class I subjects
Material and Methods The records of orthodontic patients treated at the XXXXXX from January 2008 to June 2018 were screened for the following inclusion criteria: - Pre-pubertal age at treatment start; - Class III malocclusion defined as an ANB angle
Summary
The impaction of maxillary canines is the most frequent eruption pathology after that of mandibular and maxillary third molars, and it is found in almost 2% of the population [1]. Laurenziello et al studied the cephalometric characteristics associated with palatally impacted canines and found that facial divergence (SN-GoMe angle) could be used to assess the risk of canine impaction in combination with the α-angle (the angle of the long axis of the maxillary canine to the midsagittal plane) and the distance of the canine cusp to the occlusal plane [10] Taken together, these are often the skeletal features of Class III malocclusions [11,12]. The aim of the present investigation was to study if in an orthodontic population, skeletal Class III subjects exhibit a different prevalence of maxillary canine impaction compared to skeletal Class I subjects. The aim of the present investigation was to evaluate if an orthodontic population of Class III malocclusion patients shows a different prevalence of maxillary canine impaction than Class I subjects. Conclusions: Patients with skeletal Class III malocclusions did not show a different prevalence of canine impaction; such skeletal features cannot be used as a diagnostic aid for assessment of the risk of maxillary canine impaction
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
