Comparison of Lateral Tooth Volume and Morphology Between Buccally and Palatally Localised Unilateral Impacted Maxillary Canine Cases on Cone-Beam Computed Tomography.

ABSTRACT: The aim of this study was to compare the lateral tooth volume and morphology differences between buccally and palatally localized unilateral impacted maxillary canine (IMC) patients with volumetric and linear measurements on cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) records. CBCT records of 48 individuals with 24-buccally and 24-palatally localized unilateral IMCs were included to the study. The patients comprised 34 females, 14 males, with a mean age of 17.71 (±SD 6.63 years). This split-mouth, retrospective case-control, study consisted of buccally and palatally IMC group, and each group was categorized into 2 sub-groups as impacted and erupted side. Lateral tooth volume, tooth length, mesiodistal-buccolingual crown widths, mesiodistal- buccolingual root widths at cemento-enamel junction (CEJ), at 4 mm apical to CEJ, at 8 mm apical to CEJ, mesiodistal crown-root angle, arch perimeter measurements were performed on CBCT images. The data were analyzed by factorial design repeated measures ANOVA. Bonferroni test was used for post-hoc analysis. The total volume, mesiodistal - buccolingual crown widths, buccolingual root width of lateral incisor at CEJ were statistically smaller in palatally IMC group. The lateral incisor's length, and arch perimeter were statistically shorter, mesiodistal, buccolingual root widths at 8 mm apical to CEJ, and crown-root angle of the lateral were narrower on impacted side than erupted side. The volume and crown widths of lateral incisor are effective in sagittal localization of IMC. The shorter length, narrower apical root morphology and mesially inclined crown-root angle of lateral incisor are noteworthy on impacted sides, regardless of sagittal position of IMC.

Assessment of Pain, Anxiety, and Cortisol Levels During the Initial Aligning Phase of Fixed Orthodontic Treatment.

OBJECTIVE: We assessed pain and anxiety using psychological testing instruments (State-Trait Anxiety Inventory for Children, visual analog scale) and a physiological testing instrument (salivary cortisol hormone level) after the insertion of orthodontic appliances and during the initial alignment phase of orthodontic treatment. METHODS: The study group involved two groups matched according to age and gender. Group 1 used 0.016-, 0.016×0.016-, and 0.16×0.22-inch and Group 2 used 0.014-, 0.016-, and 0.016×0.016-inch superelastic nickel-titanium archwires in the initial alignment phase of treatment. Pain and anxiety instruments were applied, and saliva samples were collected from the patients before and after molar band insertions, and bracket and initial archwire placement, and 7 days after the initial bonding and archwire replacements. RESULTS: Cortisol levels and state anxiety scores revealed statistically significant differences within groups (p<0.01, p<0.05). No significant differences were found between Group 1 and Group 2 in cortisol hormone levels, anxiety scores, or pain measurements (p>0.05). Although not statistically significant, the most severe pain was measured in the posterior teeth after band insertion and in the anterior teeth after the first archwire insertion (p>0.05). CONCLUSION: Orthodontic appliances and the initial alignment phase of orthodontic treatment affect patients' anxiety and cortisol hormone levels. Both archwires were equally effective with regard to perceived pain, anxiety, and stress hormone levels.