LOGIN
 
Share Page:
Back

Volume 29 , Issue 5
September/October 2014

Pages 11231129


Analysis of Facial Bone Wall Dimensions and Sagittal Root Position in the Maxillary Esthetic Zone: A Retrospective Study Using Cone Beam Computed Tomography

Hui-ming Wang, DDS, PhD/Jian-wei Shen, DDS, PhD/Meng-fei Yu, DDS, PhD/ Xiao-yi Chen, DDS, PhD/Qiao-hong Jiang, DDS, PhD/Fu-ming He, DDS, MD


PMID: 25216138
DOI: 10.11607/jomi.3348

Purpose: To determine the thickness of the facial bone wall and the sagittal angulation between the long axis of the teeth and the long axis of the associated alveolar bone in the maxillary esthetic zone using cone beam computed tomography (CBCT). Materials and Methods: A retrospective radiographic study of CBCT images was conducted in 300 patients. The distance between the cementoenamel junction (CEJ) and the facial bone crest, the thickness of the facial bone wall (4 mm apical to the CEJ and midroot), and the sagittal angle between the long axis of teeth and the long axis of the respective alveolar bone were measured. Descriptive statistics and frequency analyses were performed. Results: The sample included 133 men and 167 women (mean age, 36.9 years; range, 18 to 60 years). The distance between the CEJ and the facial bone crest varied between 0.1 and 4 mm and showed an overall tendency to increase with age. Almost 80% of anterior teeth and 40% of premolars exhibited a thin facial bone wall (< 1 mm), and nearly 30% of sites had a bone wall thinner than 0.5 mm. The sagittal angle at approximately 80% of central incisor and second premolar sites was < 20 degrees, but the angle at more than 40% of canine sites was ≥ 30 degrees. There was a significant decrease in facial bone wall thickness from premolars to anterior teeth. Conclusion: The facial bone wall in most maxillary anterior teeth was very thin. There was a substantial sagittal angulation between the long axes of teeth and those of their respective alveolar bone in most esthetic zone positions. CBCT analyses of the facial bone wall and the sagittal angle are recommended to ensure the most appropriate dental implant treatment approach.


Full Text PDF File | Order Article

 

 
Get Adobe Reader
Adobe Acrobat Reader is required to view PDF files. This is a free program available from the Adobe web site.
Follow the download directions on the Adobe web site to get your copy of Adobe Acrobat Reader.

 

© 2017 Quintessence Publishing Co, Inc JOMI Home
Current Issue
Ahead of Print
Archive
Author Guidelines
About
Accepted Manuscripts
Submission Form
Submit
Reprints
Permission
Advertising
Quintessence Home
Terms of Use
Privacy Policy
About Us
Contact Us
Help