Dehiscence and fenestration in skeletal Class I, II, and III malocclusions assessed with cone-beam computed tomography

Basit Öğe Kaydı
dc.contributor.authorYagci, Ahmet
dc.contributor.authorVeli, Ilknur
dc.contributor.authorUysal, Tancan
dc.contributor.authorUcar, Faruk Izzet
dc.contributor.authorOzer, Torun
dc.contributor.authorEnhos, Sukru
dc.date.accessioned2024-04-24T17:18:45Z
dc.date.available2024-04-24T17:18:45Z
dc.date.issued2012
dc.departmentDicle Üniversitesien_US
dc.description.abstractObjective: To test the null hypothesis that the presence of dehiscence and fenestration was not different among patients with skeletal Class I, II, and III malocclusions. Materials and Methods: In this retrospective study, a total of 123 cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) images were obtained with an iCAT scanner (Imaging Sciences International, Hatfield, Pa). Patients with normal vertical patterns were classified according to dental malocclusion and ANB angle. Class I comprised 41 patients-21 girls and 20 boys (mean age, 22.4 +/- 4.5 years); Class II comprised 42 patients-22 girls and 20 boys (mean age, 21.5 +/- 4.2 years); and Class III comprised 40 subjects-22 girls and 18 boys (mean age, 22.1 +/- 4.5 years). A total of 3444 teeth were evaluated. Analysis of variance and Tukey's test were used for statistical comparisons at the P <.05 level. Results: Statistical analysis indicated that the Class II group had a greater prevalence of fenestration than the other groups (P <.001). No difference was found in the prevalence of dehiscence among the three groups. Although fenestration had greater prevalence in the maxilla, more dehiscence was found in the mandible for all groups. In Class I, alveolar defects (dehiscence, fenestration) were matched relatively in both jaws. Furthermore, Class II and Class III subjects had more alveolar defects (41.11% and 45.02%, respectively) in the mandible. Dehiscences were seen with greater frequency in the mandibular incisors of all groups. Conclusion: The null hypothesis was rejected. Significant differences in the presence of fenestration were found among subjects with skeletal Class I, Class II, and Class III malocclusions. Fenestrations had greater prevalence in the maxilla, but more dehiscences were found in the mandible. (Angle Orthod. 2012;82:67-74.)en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.2319/040811-250.1
dc.identifier.endpage74en_US
dc.identifier.issn0003-3219
dc.identifier.issn1945-7103
dc.identifier.issue1en_US
dc.identifier.pmid21696298
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-84855522058
dc.identifier.scopusqualityQ1
dc.identifier.startpage67en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.2319/040811-250.1
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11468/18896
dc.identifier.volume82en_US
dc.identifier.wosWOS:000299136300011
dc.identifier.wosqualityQ3
dc.indekslendigikaynakWeb of Science
dc.indekslendigikaynakScopus
dc.indekslendigikaynakPubMed
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherE H Angle Education Research Foundation, Incen_US
dc.relation.ispartofAngle Orthodontist
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessen_US
dc.subjectFenestrationen_US
dc.subjectDehiscenceen_US
dc.subjectTomographyen_US
dc.subjectOrthodontic Malocclusionen_US
dc.titleDehiscence and fenestration in skeletal Class I, II, and III malocclusions assessed with cone-beam computed tomographyen_US
dc.titleDehiscence and fenestration in skeletal Class I, II, and III malocclusions assessed with cone-beam computed tomography
dc.typeArticleen_US

Dosyalar

Koleksiyon

WoS İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu
PubMed İndeksli Yayın Koleksiyonu
Scopus İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu