Bone Density Level Difference between Maxillary and Mandibular 2nd Premolar and 1st Molar in Iraqi Adults with Class I Occlusion

Maha Ali Hasan Al-Juboori, Hadeel A. Al-Hashimi, Shifaa H. Al-Naimi

Abstract


Background: Development of techniques that could adequately provide anchorage in moving individual tooth or groups of teeth in
desired direction is one of the major concerns of orthodontic. Mini-implants provide reliable stable anchorage. The aim of this study was
to compare of the bone density between two points within alveolar bone to decide which one was more reliable for insertion of mini-implant.
Materials and method: Computed tomographic images were obtained for 70 patients (24 males and 46 females) with an age range 18-
30 years. Bone density of buccal cortical and cancellous bones was measured between 2nd premolar and 1st molar at two preselected
level (points 3 and 6 mm) from the alveolar crest in both maxilla and mandible.
Results: According to independent t-test, the bone density at point 6 mm was higher than that at point 3 mm with a statistically significant
difference between them in both maxilla and mandible except in maxillary cancellous bone which shows a non-significant difference.
Conclusions: It was concluded that the alveolar bone density increased from the alveolar bone crest toward the basal bone. Point 6 mm
is more recommended in the upper jaw, while in the lower jaw, point 3 mm is more recommended.


Full Text:

PDF

References


Lee JS, Kim JK, Park YC, Vanarsdall RL. Applications of

Orthodontic Mini Implants. Chicago, III: Quintessence

Publishing Company; 2007: chapters 1, 8–10.

Qiu L, Haruyama N, Suzuki S, Yamada D, Obayashie N,

Kurabayashi T, Moriyama K. Accuracy of orthodontic

miniscrew implantation guided by stereolithographic

surgical stent based on cone-beam CT–derived 3D images.

Angle Orthodontist 2012; 82(2): 284-93.

Walter A, Winsauer H, Marcé-Nogué J, Mojal S, Puigdollers A. Design characteristics, primary stability and risk of

fracture of orthodontic mini-implants: pilot scan electron

microscope and mechanical studies. Med Oral Patol Oral

Cir Bucal 2013; 18(5): e804-10.

Chun YS, Lim WH. Bone density at interradicular sites:

implications for orthodontic mini-implant placement.

Orthod Craniofac Res 2009; 12: 25–32. (IVSL(

Celenk C, Celenk P. Relationship of mandibular and cervical

vertebral bone density using computed tomography.

Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2008; 37: 47–51.

Gulsahi A, Paksoy CS, Ozden S, Kucuk NO, Cebeci ARI,

Genc Y. Assessment of bone mineral density in the

jaws and its relationship to radiomorphometric indices.

Dentomaxillofacial Radiology 2010; 39: 284-289.

John JBA, Sanford CG, Philip JK. Diet, Nutrients, and Bone

Health. CRC Press 2011 page 304.

Misch CE. Density of bone: effect on treatment plans, surgical

approach, healing, and progressive bone loading. Int J Oral

Implantol 1990; 6(2): 23-31.

Bjӧrk A. Krebs A, Solow B. A method for epidemiological

registration of malocclusion. Acta odont scand 1964; 22:

-41.

Steiner CC. Cephalometric for you and me. Am.J.

Orthodontist: 1953; 39(10): 729-55.

Harpenau L. Hall’s Critical Decisions in Periodontology.

rd ed. PMPH-USA, 2013, Page 74.

Park HS, Lee YJ, Jeong SH, and Kwon TG. Density of the

alveolar and basal bones of the maxilla and the mandible.

American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial

Orthopedics 2008; 133(1): 30-37. (IVSL)

Dumitrache M, Grenard A. [Mapping mini-implant anatomic

sites in the area of the maxillary first molar with the aid of

the NewTom 3G® system]. Orthod Fr 2010; 81(4): 287-99.

Park HS, Bae SM, Kyung HM, Sung JH. Micro-implant

anchorage for treatment of skeletal Class I bialveolar

protrusion. J Clin Orthod 2001; 35: 417-22.

Park HS, Kwon TG. Sliding mechanics with microscrew

implant anchorage. Angle Orthod 2004; 74: 703-10.

Borges MS, Mucha JN. Bone density assessment for miniimplants

position. Dental Press J Orthod 2010; 15(6):58-60.

Kuroda S, Sugawara Y, Deguchi T, Kyung HM, Takano-

Yamamoto T. Clinical use of miniscrew implant as

orthodonticanchorage: success rate and postoperative

discomfort. Am J Orthod Dentofac 2007; 131: 9–15.

Choi JH, Park CH, Yi SW, Lim HJ, Hwang HS. Bone

density measurement in interdental areas with simulated

placement of orthodontic miniscrew implants. Am J Orthod

Dentofacial Orthop 2009; 136(6): 766.e1-12. (IVSL)

Tewfiq SM, Al-Hashimi HA. Bone density determination

for the maxilla and the mandible in different age groups by

using computerized tomography (Part I). J Bagh College

Dentistry 2013; 25(1): 164-70.

Cassetta M, Sofan AAA, Altieri F, Barbato E. Evaluation of

alveolar cortical bone thickness and density for orthodontic

mini-implant placement. J Clin Exp Dent 2013; 5(5): e245-

Chugh T, Ganeshkar SV, Revankar AV, Jain AK. Quantitative

assessment of interradicular bone density in the maxilla and

mandible: implications in clinical orthodontics. Progress in

Orthodontics 2013; 14(38): 1-8.

Graber TM, Vanarsdall RL, Vig KWL. Practice In:

Orthodontics: Current Principles and Techniques. 4th ed. St

Louis: Mosby; 2005: p.221-92.

Truhlar RS, Morris HF, Ochi S, Winkler S. Second-stage

failures related to bone quality in patients receiving

endosseous dental implants: DICRG Interim Report No.

Dental Implant Clinical Research Group. Implant Dent

; 3(4):252-5.

Tehemar SH. Factors affecting heat generation during

implant site preparation: a review of biologic observations

and future considerations. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants

; 14(1): 127-36.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.26477/idj.v37i3.58

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.