Evaluation of the impacted maxillary canines position, determination of the possible indicators of the impaction difficulty, and the risk factors for adjacent teeth root resorption

Tina Pajević; Dina Vasović; Jovana Juloski; Ljiljana Vučić; Branislav Glišić

doi:10.2298/VSP220329010P

Tina Pajević University of Belgrade, Faculty of Dental Medicine, Department of Orthodontics, Belgrade, Serbia
Dina Vasović University of Belgrade, Faculty of Dental Medicine, Department of Orthodontics, Belgrade, Serbia
Jovana Juloski University of Belgrade, Faculty of Dental Medicine, Department of Orthodontics, Belgrade, Serbia
Ljiljana Vučić University of Belgrade, Faculty of Dental Medicine, Department of Orthodontics, Belgrade, Serbia
Branislav Glišić University of Belgrade, Faculty of Dental Medicine, Department of Orthodontics, Belgrade, Serbia

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2298/VSP220329010P

Keywords: cone-beam computed tomography, risk factors, tooth impacted, tooth resorption

Abstract

Background/Aim. An impacted tooth is a tooth that could not erupt and take its place in the dental row. Impacted maxillary canines are a very frequent problem in orthodontic practices. They are the second most impacted teeth, right after the third molars. The aim of this cross-sectional study was to evaluate the two-dimensional and three-dimensional position of the impacted maxillary canines and make a descriptive study analysis of possible indicators of the impaction difficulty and risk factors for adjacent tooth root resorption. Methods. In this study, 94 subjects with 116 diagnosed maxillary canine impaction were included. The two-dimensional position of the impacted canines (IC) was evaluated on the panoramic projection of the cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) images. Canine position (CP) to the X, Y, and Z-axis was measured and scored using the novel classification system that incorporates three-dimensional information of CBCT imaging – the KPG index. Based on the KPG index value, impaction was defined as easy, moderate, difficult, and extremely difficult. In order to determine indicators of impaction difficulty and risk factors of root resorption of adjacent teeth, qualitative variables (gender, side of impaction, etc.) and quantitative variables [age, canine distance to the occlusal plane (OccP), etc.] were tested with multiple logistic regression. Results. The mean age of the subjects was 19.8 ± 5.2 years. The impactions were twice as prevalent in females compared to males. Most (71.4%) impactions were unilateral in palatal position of the canines. Adjacent root resorption was present in 27.3% of cases of impaction, and the central incisor was mostly affected. More than half of the impactions were of moderate level. In univariable analysis, canine distance to sagittal medial line (SML), angle between canine and SML, OccP, and first premolar, respectively, were significant in impaction difficulty prediction. Multivariable analysis showed that angle between canine and the first premolar could be a risk factor for adjacent root resorption. Conclusion. Most impacted maxillary canines were in the palatal position, with a KPG index value of moderate difficulty. Besides the position to the OccP and SML, angle between canine and the first premolar should be estimated, as a part of diagnostic procedures, to evaluate the risk of adjacent root resorption, prevent resorption, and decide on the treatment plan.

References

1. Al-Zoubi H, Alharbi AA, Ferguson DJ, Zafar MS. Frequency of impacted teeth and categorization of impacted canines: A retrospective radiographic study using orthopantomograms. Eur J Dent 2017; 11(1): 117–21.

2. Proffit WR, Fields Jr HW, Sarver DM. Contemporary Orthodontics. 4th ed. St. Louis: Mosby; 2007.

3. Dewel BF. The upper cuspid: Its development and impaction. Angle Orthod 1949; 19(2): 79–90.

4. Lövgren ML, Dahl O, Uribe P, Ransjö M, Westerlund A. Prevalence of impacted maxillary canines-an epidemiological study in a region with systematically implemented interceptive treatment. Eur J Orthod 2019; 41(5): 454–9.

5. Becker A, Smith P, Behar R. The incidence of anomalous maxillary lateral incisors in relation to palatally-displaced cuspids. Angle Orthod 1981; 51(1): 24–9.

6. Grisar K, Piccart F, Al-Rimawi AS, Basso I, Politis C, Jacobs R. Three-dimensional position of impacted maxillary canines: Prevalence, associated pathology and introduction to a new classification system. Clin Exp Dent Res 2019; 5(1): 19–25.

7. Sacerdoti R, Baccetti T. Dentoskeletal features associated with unilateral or bilateral palatal displacement of maxillary canines. Angle Orthod 2004; 74(6): 725–32.

8. Lai CS, Bornstein MM, Mock L, Heuberger BM, Dietrich T, Katsaros C. Impacted maxillary canines and root resorptions of neighbouring teeth: a radiographic analysis using cone-beam computed tomography. Eur J Orthod 2013; 35(4): 529–38.

9. Liu DG, Zhang WL, Zhang ZY, Wu YT, Ma XC. Localization of impacted maxillary canines and observation of adjacent incisor resorption with cone-beam computed tomography. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2008; 105(1): 91–8.

10. Walker L, Enciso R, Mah J. Three-dimensional localization of maxillary canines with cone-beam computed tomography. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2005; 128(4): 418–23.

11. Mitsea A, Palikaraki G, Karamesinis K, Vastardis H, Gizani S, Sifakakis I. Evaluation of Lateral Incisor Resorption Caused by Impacted Maxillary Canines Based on CBCT: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Children (Basel) 2022; 9(7): 1006.

12. Kalavritinos M, Benetou V, Bitsanis E, Sanoudos M, Alexiou K, Tsiklakis K, et al. Incidence of incisor root resorption associated with the position of the impacted maxillary canines: A cone-beam computed tomographic study. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2020; 157(1): 73–9.

13. Simić S, Nikolić P, Stanišić Zindović J, Jovanović R, Stošović Kalezić I, Djordjević A, et al. Root Resorptions on Adjacent Teeth Associated with Impacted Maxillary Canines. Diagnostics (Basel) 2022; 12(2): 380.

14. Kau CH, Pan P, Gallerano RL, English JD. A novel 3D classification system for canine impactions--the KPG index. Int J Med Robot 2009; 5(3): 291–6.

15. Kau CH, Lee JJ, Souccar NM. The validation of a novel index assessing canine impactions. Eur J Dent 2013; 7(4): 399–404.

16. San Martín DE, English JD, Kau CH, Gallerano RL, McGrory KR, Salas AM, et al. The KPG index--a novel 3D classification system for maxillary canine impactions. Tex Dent J 2012; 129(3): 265–74.

17. Rafflenbeul F, Gros CI, Lefebvre F, Bahi-Gross S, Maizeray R, Bolender Y. Prevalence and risk factors of root resorption of adjacent teeth in maxillary canine impaction, among untreated children and adolescents. Eur J Orthod 2019; 41(5): 447–53.

18. Jain S, Debbarma S. Patterns and prevalence of canine anomalies in orthodontic patients. Med Pharm Rep 2019; 92(1): 72–8.

19. Naoumova J, Kjellberg H. The use of panoramic radiographs to decide when interceptive extraction is beneficial in children with palatally displaced canines based on a randomized clinical trial. Eur J Orthod 2018; 40(6): 565–74.

20. Simić S, Pavlović J, Nikolić PV, Vujaĉić A, Vukićević V, Jovanović R. The prevalence of peg-shaped and missing lateral incisors with maxillary impacted canines. Vojnosanit Pregl 2019; 76(1): 61–66.

21. Bolas-Colvee B, Tarazona B, Paredes-Gallardo V, Arias-De Luxan S. Relationship between perception of smile esthetics and orthodontic treatment in Spanish patients. PLoS One 2018; 13(8): e0201102.

22. Pithon MM, Bastos GW, Miranda NS, Sampaio T, Ribeiro TP, Nascimento LE, et al. Esthetic perception of black spaces between maxillary central incisors by different age groups. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2013; 143(3): 371–5.

23. Grisar K, Luyten J, Preda F, Martin C, Hoppenreijs T, Politis C, et al. Interventions for impacted maxillary canines: A systematic review of the relationship between initial canine position and treatment outcome. Orthod Craniofac Res 2021; 24(2): 180–93.

24. Sosars P, Jakobsone G, Neimane L, Mukans M. Comparative analysis of panoramic radiography and cone-beam computed tomography in treatment planning of palatally displaced canines. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2020; 157(5): 719–27.

25. Alqerban A, Jacobs R, Fieuws S, Willems G. Predictors of root resorption associated with maxillary canine impaction in panoramic images. Eur J Orthod 2016; 38(3): 292–9.

26. Alemam AA, Abu Alhaija ES, Mortaja K, AlTawachi A. Incisor root resorption associated with palatally displaced maxillary canines: Analysis and prediction using discriminant function analysis. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2020; 157(1): 80–90.

27. Chaushu S, Kaczor-Urbanowicz K, Zadurska M, Becker A. Predisposing factors for severe incisor root resorption associated with impacted maxillary canines. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2015; 147(1): 52–60.

28. Ericson S, Kurol J. Resorption of maxillary lateral incisors caused by ectopic eruption of the canines. A clinical and radiographic analysis of predisposing factors. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1988; 94(6): 503–13.

29. Schroder AGD, Guariza-Filho O, de Araujo CM, Ruellas AC, Tanaka OM, Porporatti A. To what extent are impacted canines associated with root resorption of the adjacent tooth?: A systematic review with meta-analysis. J Am Dent Assoc 2018; 149(9): 765–77. e8.

30. Uribe P, Ransjö M, Westerlund A. Clinical predictors of maxillary canine impaction: a novel approach using multivariate analysis. Eur J Orthod 2017; 39(2): 153–60.

31. Peck JL, Sameshima GT, Miller A, Worth P, Hatcher DC. Mesiodistal root angulation using panoramic and cone beam CT. Angle Orthod 2007; 77(2): 206–13.

32. Alqerban A, Jacobs R, Fieuws S, Willems G. Comparison of two cone beam computed tomographic systems versus panoramic imaging for localization of impacted maxillary canines and detection of root resorption. Eur J Orthod 2011; 33(1): 93–102.

33. Jung YH, Liang H, Benson BW, Flint DJ, Cho BH. The assessment of impacted maxillary canine position with panoramic radiography and cone beam CT. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2012; 41(5): 356–60.

34. Dalessandri D, Migliorati M, Visconti L, Contardo L, Kau CH, Martin C. KPG index versus OPG measurements: a comparison between 3D and 2D methods in predicting treatment duration and difficulty level for patients with impacted maxillary canines. Biomed Res Int 2014; 2014: 537620.

35. Dalessandri D, Migliorati M, Rubiano R, Visconti L, Contardo L, Di Lenarda R, et al. Reliability of a novel CBCT-based 3D classification system for maxillary canine impactions in orthodontics: the KPG index. Sci World J 2013; 2013: 921234.