Radiographic Analysis and Prevalence of Impacted Maxillary Canine Teeth in Children Between 8 and 16 Years

  • Bizcar Mercado B
  • Sandoval Vidal P
  • Navarro Cáceres P
N/ACitations
Citations of this article
33Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

BIZCAR, M. B.; SANDOVAL, V. P. & NAVARRO, C. P. Radiographic analysis and prevalence of impacted maxillary canine teeth in children between 8 and 16 years. Int. J. Odontostomat., 9(2):283-287, 2015. ABSTRACT: The objective of this study was to determine the prevalence of impacted maxillary canines and analyze variables associated with its retention in panoramic radiographs. Manual and Retrospective observational study of 16,835 records. A sample of 1,353 panoramic radiographs was obtained. The variables measured were canine angle, distance from the canine apex to occlusal plane, vertical and horizontal canine location. For reliable measurement an intra class Fleiss and Cohen correlation coefficient was used (0.997). Prevalence was 2.3%. 31 subjects had one or both retained canines. Average age 10.77±2.45, 61.3% were women. 64.5% presented unilateral retaining of which the largest percentage was left. A total of 41 retained canines were observed. Distance to occlusal plane 19 mm on average. In relation to the vertical location the highest percentage (48.7%) was found in the apical third. Regarding the horizontal location the highest percentage (77.6%) was found in sectors 1, 2 and 3. When analyzing the canine angle it was found that 83% measured 31 degrees or more. Radicular resorption was observed in 2 lateral incisors. The prevalence found is similar to that reported in the international literature. It occurred more frequently in women and left unilateral both not statistically significant.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Bizcar Mercado, B., Sandoval Vidal, P., & Navarro Cáceres, P. (2015). Radiographic Analysis and Prevalence of Impacted Maxillary Canine Teeth in Children Between 8 and 16 Years. International Journal of Odontostomatology, 9(2), 283–287. https://doi.org/10.4067/s0718-381x2015000200015

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free