Comparative Study of Two Ways to Measure Root Trunk Length to Assess the Possibility of Crown Lengthening in Molars: Measuring Parallel to the Root Surface vs Parallel to the Tooth Axis

IF 1.3 4区 医学 Q3 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
Vittawin Dechosilpa, Thanaporn Chosivasakul, Thanatcha Munkongdee, Manita Phoamporn, Apinporn Pongpornprot, Chutiya Sriworakul, Anek Chayasadom
{"title":"Comparative Study of Two Ways to Measure Root Trunk Length to Assess the Possibility of Crown Lengthening in Molars: Measuring Parallel to the Root Surface vs Parallel to the Tooth Axis","authors":"Vittawin Dechosilpa,&nbsp;Thanaporn Chosivasakul,&nbsp;Thanatcha Munkongdee,&nbsp;Manita Phoamporn,&nbsp;Apinporn Pongpornprot,&nbsp;Chutiya Sriworakul,&nbsp;Anek Chayasadom","doi":"10.11607/prd.5801","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The aim of this study was to compare root trunk measurements taken parallel to the tooth axis (TA) to those taken parallel to the root surface (RS) in order to assess the decision-making implications of each method on crown-lengthening surgery. A total of 672 root trunks were measured via CBCT in two planes: TA and RS. The possibility of performing crown lengthening in each clinical situation based on the distance from the cementoenamel junction (CEJ) to the crestal bone (CB) after ostectomy (CEJ-CB) was judged and compared between groups. When RS was used as a reference point, the proportions of cases that judged crown lengthening to be possible were 83.63%, 59.08%, and 39.18% for CEJ-CB values of 4, 5, and 6 mm, respectively. When TA was used instead, those proportions decreased by 3.87% to 7.29%. The lingual root trunk of the lower first molar (LFL) with a CEJ-CB of 4 to 5 mm emerged as the most problematic area; here, the difference between reference planes occurred with one out of every six teeth. Within the limits of this study, utilizing TA for surgical crown-lengthening treatment planning is not ideal because it may lead to extraction of many savable teeth.</p>","PeriodicalId":54948,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Periodontics & Restorative Dentistry","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Periodontics & Restorative Dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.11607/prd.5801","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The aim of this study was to compare root trunk measurements taken parallel to the tooth axis (TA) to those taken parallel to the root surface (RS) in order to assess the decision-making implications of each method on crown-lengthening surgery. A total of 672 root trunks were measured via CBCT in two planes: TA and RS. The possibility of performing crown lengthening in each clinical situation based on the distance from the cementoenamel junction (CEJ) to the crestal bone (CB) after ostectomy (CEJ-CB) was judged and compared between groups. When RS was used as a reference point, the proportions of cases that judged crown lengthening to be possible were 83.63%, 59.08%, and 39.18% for CEJ-CB values of 4, 5, and 6 mm, respectively. When TA was used instead, those proportions decreased by 3.87% to 7.29%. The lingual root trunk of the lower first molar (LFL) with a CEJ-CB of 4 to 5 mm emerged as the most problematic area; here, the difference between reference planes occurred with one out of every six teeth. Within the limits of this study, utilizing TA for surgical crown-lengthening treatment planning is not ideal because it may lead to extraction of many savable teeth.

测量臼齿根干长度以评估冠延长可能性的两种方法的比较研究:平行于根面测量与平行于牙轴测量
本研究的目的是比较平行于牙轴(TA)的根干测量和平行于根面(RS)的根干测量,以评估每种方法对冠延长手术的决策意义。通过CBCT在TA和RS两个平面测量672根干,根据骨水泥牙釉质连接处(CEJ)到冠骨(CB)的距离判断不同临床情况下进行冠延长的可能性,并比较两组间的差异。以RS为参照点,当CEJ-CB值为4、5、6 mm时,判断冠延长可行的病例比例分别为83.63%、59.08%和39.18%。用TA代替后,这一比例下降了3.87%,为7.29%。下颌第一磨牙(LFL)的舌根干(CEJ-CB为4 ~ 5mm)是最成问题的区域;在这里,参考平面之间的差异发生在每六个牙齿中有一个。在本研究范围内,利用TA进行手术冠延长治疗计划并不理想,因为它可能导致拔除许多可保存的牙齿。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
6.20%
发文量
113
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Periodontics & Restorative Dentistry will publish manuscripts concerned with all aspects of clinical periodontology, restorative dentistry, and implantology. This includes pertinent research as well as clinical methodology (their interdependence and relationship should be addressed where applicable); proceedings of relevant symposia or conferences; and quality review papers. Original manuscripts are considered for publication on the condition that they have not been published or submitted for publication elsewhere.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信