Treatment of Ankyloglossia: A Review.

AIM: The aim of this narrative review is to analyze and compare the current scientific evidence regarding the diagnosis and treatment of hypertrophic lingual frenulum in preschool and school-age children. The treatments considered in this review are traditional surgical therapy, laser-assisted surgical therapy, and functional rehabilitation therapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A comprehensive literature review was conducted using the PubMed and PubMed Central search engines, considering articles published in the English language between 1 January 2000 and 30 June 2022. The bibliographic search was performed using the following keywords as search strings: "lingual", "frenulectomy", "frenulotomy", "frenulum", "ankyloglossia", and "laser." RESULTS: A total of 14 articles were included in this review, including four prospective observational studies, one case-control study, three cross-sectional studies, four retrospective studies, and one randomized controlled trial. The data extracted from each article are summarized in a table. CONCLUSIONS: In the literature, there are still limited studies regarding the treatment of hypertrophic frenulum. No common indications for the treatment of ankyloglossia and universally used classification for lingual frenulum were found. Currently, clinicians prefer the use of a diode laser for treatment. This method offers several advantages over the use of a scalpel blade. Many studies agree on the usefulness of providing patients with myofunctional rehabilitation to improve lingual mobility, both prior to surgical therapy and in the postoperative period.

Association between teeth agenesis and Angle's classes in an Italian population.

BACKGROUND: Teeth agenesis or hypodontia consists of the developmental absence of one or more teeth. Many studies confirm that this condition is almost frequent in general population; the prevalence reported is between 2.7% and 11.3%. This condition shows a multifactorial etiology: genetic factors, hereditary factors, environmental factors, local or general infective processes, radiations, drugs and traumas. The aim of this observational study was to evaluate the prevalence of tooth agenesis in a sample of orthodontic healthy patients considering each Angle malocclusion. METHODS: Nine hundred patients from a University clinic and three private practices were analyzed through intra and extra oral photographs, orthodontic study casts, panoramic radiographs and lateral cephalograms. The following inclusion criteria were applied: non-syndromic patients, without previous orthodontic, prosthetic treatment or extractions. Patients' clinical data consisted in general and dental anamnesis, intra and extra oral photographs, orthodontic study casts, digital panoramic radiographs and lateral cephalograms. The whole sample was divided into four groups (A-B-C-D) in relation with Angle's malocclusion and dental agenesis registered. RESULTS: The whole sample presented a mean prevalence of the condition of 8.80%. Class II/2 is the most affected malocclusion with 20.37% of the patients affected by the condition, followed by class III (11.19%), class II/2 (8.05%) and class I (6.62%). The χ2 test demonstrated a statistically significant different distribution of the condition between the four groups (P value =0.0059). The four groups presented also different patterns of missing teeth. CONCLUSIONS: We found a significantly different distribution of the condition in the different malocclusions with class II/2 presenting the higher prevalence of tooth agenesis (20.37%). The most frequent teeth affected by agenesis in the entire sample are respectively: mandibular second premolars (32.40%), followed by the maxillary lateral incisors (27.70%) and the maxillary second premolars (15.50%).

Prevalence and patterns of tooth agenesis in Angle class II division 2 malocclusion in Italy: A case-control study.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this case-control retrospective study was to assess the prevalence and pattern of tooth agenesis in a group of Italian Caucasian test subjects with Class II division 2 malocclusion. The findings were then compared with an Italian control group of orthodontic patients and with previous studies performed in other countries. MATERIAL AND METHOD: Six hundred patients (37 subjects with Angle Class II division 2 malocclusion and 563 orthodontic patients with other malocclusions), aged 7 or older, from the Orthodontic Department of University of Padua Dental Clinic were collected. For this investigation, two expert operators evaluated the Angle Class from dental casts, intraoral photographs and lateral cephalograms. Inclusion criteria for Class II division 2 were: U1-SN less than 90° and overbite>3mm. Tooth agenesis were assessed with digital panoramic radiographs. Third molars were excluded from the analysis. Descriptive analysis using absolute and relative frequencies were performed to check out the prevalence and pattern of tooth agenesis in the sample considered. The relative frequencies in each table were calculated as a percentage based from column total. RESULTS: The prevalence of tooth agenesis in the Angle Class II division 2 group was 18.92%, while in the general population was 8.35%. This result was sufficient to demonstrate a significant difference between the two groups concerning the tooth agenesis prevalence (P-value<0.05). CONCLUSION: Prevalence of permanent tooth agenesis was more than 2 times higher in the Class II division 2 group rather than in the control group. No agenesis of maxillary lateral incisors was found in Class II division 2 group.