Analysis of occlusal characteristics of identical homozygous twins
Abstract
Background/Aim. Functionally stable occlusion is characterized by optimal and orthopedic stable position of the condyle, harmonious contact ratio of upper and lower teeth in the final occlusal position of the mandible, optimal relationship of dental arches at the eccentric movement of the lower jaw and stable interocclusal space in physiological position. As there are no ideal order of teeth and absolute intermaxilar harmony nor individually acceptable standards or prototype of functionally optimal occlusion, the aim of this study was to analyze occlusal characteristics of identical twins. Methods. This clinical-epidemiological and functional study involved 30 pairs of identical twins, both males and females, aged 20 to 40 years. The main criterion for the selection of participants was preserved function of orofacial system, as a precondition for application of the Peer Assessment Rating (PAR) index, which is the most reliable tool for diagnosing malocclusion and evaluating occlusal parameters: the distance between the contact points of agonists of front segments of the dental arches, side occlusion of the sagittal, vertical and transversal position, overjet, anterior crossbite, deep and open bite, overbite of incisors and relationship of middle dental arches. Results. Using t-test for independent samples, no significant difference in the values of PAR index, according to gender, was established. The average difference of 0.833 between the twin groups (for male twins: ґ = 7.97, SD = 6.625; for female twins: ґ = 7.13, SD = 5.606) was not statistically significant [t (58) = 0.526; p = 0.601; 95% confidence interval: -2.339–4.005]. Conclusion. The lack of significant differences in occlusal PAR index analysis in both the same and different twin groups, implies the dominance of hereditary factors.
References
Zwemer TJ . Bouchrs clinical dental terminology. 4th ed. USA: Mosby Year Book Inc; 1993.
Ash MM, Ramfjord PS. Occlusion. 4th ed. Philadelphia, London, Toronto: W.B.Saunders Co; 1996.
Okeson JP. Temporomandibular disordersandocclusion. 5th ed. Croatian edition. Zagreb: Medical Biochemists; 2008.
Angle EH. Classification of malocclusion. Dent Cosmos 1899; 41: 248–64.
Stanišić-Sinobad D. Basically gnatology. Belgrade. Beogradsko mašinsko-grafičko preduzeće/BmG; 2001. (Serbian)
Korioth TW, Hannam AG. Effect of bilateral asymmetric tooth clenching on load distribution at the mandibular condyles. J Prosthet Dent 1990; 64(1): 62−73.
Nikolić I, Rančić G. Embryology of man. Belgrade: Data Status; 2010. (Serbian)
Segal N. Entwined lives: twins and what they tell us about hu-man behavior. New York: Dutton; 1999; 2(4): 291−2.
Mayers M, Firestone AR, Rashid R, Vig KW. Comparison of peer assessment rating (PAR) index scores of plaster and computer-based digital models. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2005; 128(4): 431−4.
Whiteside SP, Rixon E. Speech tempo and fundamental fre-quency patterns: a case study of male monozygotic twins and an age- and sex-matched sibling. Logoped Phoniatr Vocol 2013; 38(4): 173−81.
Pearsall-Jones JG, Piek JP, Steed L, McDougall MR, Levy F. Monozygotic twins concordant and discordant for DCD: two sides to the story. Twin Res Hum Genet 2011; 14(1): 79−87.
Sutcliffe AG, Derom C. Follow-up of twins: Health, behaviour, speech, language outcomes and implications for parents. Early Hum Dev 2006; 82(6): 379−86.
Van Lierde KM, Vinck B, De Ley S, Clement G, Van Cauwenberge P. Genetics of vocal quality characteristics in monozygotic twins: a multiparameter approach. J Voice 2005; 19(4): 511−8.
Shea SA, Benchetrit G, Pham Dinh T, Hamilton RD, Guz A. The breathing patterns of identical twins. Respir Physiol 1989; 75(2): 211−23.
Townsend G, Richards L. Twins and twinning, dentists and den-tistry. Aust Dent J 1990; 35(4): 317−27.
Djordjević J, Sćepan I, Glisić B. Evaluation of agreement and cor-relation of three occlusal indices in an assessment of ortho-dontic treatment need. Vojnosanit Pregl 2011; 68(2): 125−9. (Serbian)
Lee SJ, Ahn SJ, Lim WH, Lee S, Lim J, Park HJ. Variation of the intermaxillary tooth-size relationship in normal occlusion. Eur J Orthod 2011; 33(1): 9−14.
Sharma A, Rahul GR, Poduval ST, Shetty K, Gupta B, Rajora V. History of materials used for recording static and dynamic oc-clusal contact marks: A literature review. J Clin Exp Dent 2013; 5(1): e48−e53.
Sonnesen L, Svensson P. Temporomandibular disorders and psy-chological status in adult patients with a deep bite. Eur J Or-thod 2008; 30(6): 621−9.
Gesch D. Comparison of distal and neutral craniofacial pattern in untreated subjects in terms of skeletal harmony and growth. Ann Anat 1999; 181(1): 15−8.
Condò R, Perugia C, Bartolino M, Docimo R. Analysis of clinical efficacy of interceptive treatment of Class II division 2 maloc-clusion in a pair of twins through the use of two modified re-movable appliances. Oral Implantol (Rome) 2010; 3(3): 11−25.
Manfredini D, Castroflorio T, Perinetti G, Guarda-Nardini L. Dental occlusion, body posture and temporomandibular disorders: Where we are now and where we are heading for. J Oral Re-habil 2012; 39(6): 463−71.
Pullinger A, Seligman D. Quantification and validation of predic-tive values of occlusal variables in temporomandibular disor-ders using a multifactorial analysis. J Prosthet Dent 2000; 83(1): 66−75.
Đorđević J, Šćepan I, Glišić B. Application of occlusal indices in orthodontic practice. Stom Glas S 2009; 56: 176−86. (Serbian)
Templeton KM, Powell R, Moore MB, Williams AC, Sandy JR. Are the Peer Assessment Rating Index and the Index of Treatment Complexity, Outcome, and Need suitable measures for orthognathic outcomes? Eur J Orthod 2006; 28(5): 462−6.
Arruda AO. Occlusal indexes as judged by subjective opinions. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2008; 134(5): 671−5.