Advertisement

European Archives of Paediatric Dentistry

, Volume 18, Issue 4, pp 243–250 | Cite as

Dental and craniofacial findings in 91 individuals with agenesis of permanent maxillary canines

  • K. P. Arvedsen
  • I. KjærEmail author
Original Scientific Article
  • 145 Downloads

Abstract

Aim

Agenesis of maxillary permanent canines is a rare form of agenesis (prevalence 0.07–0.13%). The aetiology is still unknown. The purpose was to focus on dentitions and craniofacial profiles in individuals with maxillary canine agenesis.

Method

From 91 individuals (10–18 years of age) 91 Orthopantomograms and 77 profile radiographs were divided accordingly: Group I: agenesis of 1 or 2 maxillary canines. Group II: several ageneses including the maxillary canines. Dentition analysis included crown/root shape, invaginations, eruption disturbances and resorption patterns. Cephalometric angular measurements and mutual comparisons between the groups were performed. Agenesis pattern in Group II was compared to agenesis pattern in a population of children and young adults not characterized by maxillary canine agenesis. Cephalometric values from both groups were compared to normal values from individuals without agenesis. Findings were statistically evaluated.

Results

Dentition: Group I: only the missing maxillary canines were deemed to be in an abnormal dental deviation. Group II: abnormal dental development regarding morphology, resorption of primary teeth and also agenesis of the first maxillary premolar. Comparison of the groups showed a difference in the pattern of malformation. Profile: Group I: anterior inclination of the maxilla and increased cranial base angle were significant findings. Group II: diminished incisor slope in the maxilla and enlarged cranial base angle were significant findings. A comparison showed a difference in maxillary inclinations of the teeth.

Conclusion

Group I dentitions are normally developed with only minor dental malformations. Group II dentitions had several dental malformations and often agenesis of the first maxillary premolar. Significant findings: first maxillary premolar agenesis in Group II and enlarged cranial base angle in both groups.

Keywords

Maxilla Canines Agenesis Orthopantomogram Profile radiographs Cephalometry 

Notes

Acknowledgments

Many sincere thanks to all those orthodontists who contributed with materials for this study. Furthermore, thanks are also due to “Union for Specialized Dentists in Orthodontics” for support and establishing contact to all specialists in orthodontics in Denmark concerning the present investigation.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

Both authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants performed by any of the authors.

References

  1. Björk A. The relationship of the jaws to the cranium. In: Lundström A (ed) Introduction to orthodontics. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company Inc.;1960. CH 7, pp. 104–40.Google Scholar
  2. Cho SY, Lee CK, Chan JCY. Congenitally missing maxillary permanent canines: report of 32 cases from an ethnic Chinese population. Int J Paediatr Dent. 2004;14:446–50.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Coulter J, Richardson A. Normal eruption of the maxillary canine quantified in three dimensions. Eur J Orthod. 1997;19:171–83.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Danielsen JC, Karimian K, Ciarlantini R, Melsen B, Kjær I. Unilateral and bilateral dental transpositions in the maxilla—dental and skeletal findings in 63 individuals. Eur Arch Paediatr Dent. 2015;16:467–76.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Fukuta Y, Totsuka M, Takeda Y, Yamamoto H. Congenital absence of the permanent canines: a clinico-statistical study. J Oral Sci. 2004;46:247–52.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Gunashekar M, Srinivas R, Dutta B. A rare case of congenital absence of permanent canines associated with other dental anomalies. J Clin Exp Dent. 2011;3:e70–2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Hansen IV, Vedtofte H, Kjær I. Remember the periroot sheet in orthodontic treatment of ectodermal dysplasia individuals. Dent Hypotheses. 2014;5:164–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Kenrad JB, Christensen IJ, Kjær I. Gender differences in patterns of second premolar agenesis observed in 4756 individuals. Eur Arch Paediatr Dent. 2013;14:397–403.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Kjær I. Morphological characteristics of dentitions developing excessive root resorption during orthodontic treatment. Eur J Orthod. 1995;17:25–34.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Lombardo C, Barbato E, Leonardi R. Bilateral maxillary canines agenesis: a case report and a literature review. Eur J Paediatr Dent. 2007;8:38.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Mani SA, Mohsin WSY, John J. Prevalence and patterns of tooth agenesis among Malay children. Southeast Asian J Trop Med Public Health. 2014;45:490–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Nodal M, Kjær I, Solow B. Craniofacial morphology in individuals with multiple congenitally missing permanent teeth. Eur J Orthod. 1994;16:104–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Parner ET, Heidmann JM, Kjær I, Væth M, Poulsen S. Biological interpretation of the correlation of emergence times of permanent teeth. J Dent Res. 2002;81:451–4.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Polder BJ, Van’t Hof MA, Van den Linden FP, Kuijpers-Jagtman AM. A meta-analysis of the prevalence of dental agenesis of permanent teeth. Comm Dent Oral Epidemiol. 2004;32:217–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Rózsa N, Nagy K, Vajó Z et al. Prevalence and distribution of permanent canine agenesis in dental paediatric and orthodontic individuals in Hungary. Eur J Orthod. 2009;31:374–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Rølling S. Hypodontia of permanent teeth in Danish schoolchildren. Eur J Oral Sci. 1980;88:365–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Rølling S, Poulsen S. Agenesis of permanent teeth in 8138 Danish schoolchildren: prevalence and intra-oral distribution according to gender. Int J Paediatr Dent. 2009;193:172–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Schalk‐Van Der Weide Y, Steen WHA, Bosman F. Taurodontism and length of teeth in individuals with oligodontia. J Oral Rehab. 1993;20:401–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Stockton DW, Das P, Goldeberg M, D’Souza RN, Patel I. Mutation of PAX9 is associated with oligodontia. Nat Genet. 2000;24:18–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© European Academy of Paediatric Dentistry 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Odontology School of Dentistry, Faculty of Health and Medical SciencesUniversity of CopenhagenCopenhagen NDenmark

Personalised recommendations