Çukurova Popülasyonunda Gelişimsel Diş Anomalisi Görülme Sıklığı: Radyografik Bir Çalışma

Yıl 2023, Cilt: 10 Sayı: 2, 434 - 439, 21.08.2023

Zehra Süsgün Yıldırım , Burcu Evlice , Ezgi Sonkaya , Hazal Duyan

https://doi.org/10.15311/selcukdentj.1168337

Öz

Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı, retrospektif olarak incelenen panoramik radyografilerde görülen dental anomalilerin tüm tip ve alt tiplerinin prevalansını değerlendirmekti.
Gereç ve Yöntemler: 2019 yılının son 6 ayında, bir fakülte hastanesine başvuran ve panoramik röntgeni çekilen 14 – 70 yaş aralığındaki 1266 hastanın radyografisi incelendi. Durum, büyüklük, sayı, biçim ve doku olarak 5 tip, toplamda 21 alt tip (Transpozisyon, Ektopi, Enversiyon, Median diastema, Mikrodonti, Makrodonti, Hipodonti, Oligodonti, Anadonti, Supernumerer, Meziodens, Talon tüberkülü (dens evaginatus), Taurodontizm, Dilaserasyon, Geminasyon, Füzyon, Concrescence, Dens in dente (dens invaginatus), Amelogenezis imperfekta, Dentinogenezis imperfekta, Dentin displazisi) gelişimsel diş anomalisi araştırıldı. Yaş ortalamaları için bağımsız örneklem t-testi, anomalilerin dağılımlarını değerlendirmek için ki-kare ve Fisher’s Exact testi kullanıldı.
Bulgular: Yaş ortalaması 36.9 olan hastaların % 27.8’inde dental anomali görüldü. Kadınlarda anomali görülme prevalansı (% 30.3) erkeklere göre (% 23.8) anlamlı olarak daha yüksekti. Anomaliye sahip kadınlarda ise biçim anomalisi (% 68.6) ve alt tipi olarak talon tüberkülü (% 40.3) prevalansı anlamlı olarak yüksekti. Diğer anomali alt tipleri ve cinsiyetler arasında istatistiksel olarak anlamlı bir fark yoktu. En sık, sırasıyla talon tüberkülü (% 36.1), dilaserasyon (% 15.3), median diastema (% 12.8), tek diş eksikliği (% 11.9) ve dens in dente (% 11.6) alt tiplerine rastlanıldı.
Sonuç: Her dört hastadan birinde dental anomaliye rastlama ihtimali olduğunu gösteren çalışmanın sonucu, başvuran her hastadan panoramik radyografi alınmasının ve detaylı bir incelemenin önemini bir kez daha ortaya koymuştur.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Dental anomali, Panoramik radyografi, Prevalans

Destekleyen Kurum

yok

Proje Numarası

yok

Teşekkür

yok

PREVALENCE OF DEVELOPMENTAL DENTAL ANOMALY IN THE CUKUROVA POPULATION: A RADIOGRAPHIC STUDY

Öz

Background: The aim of the study is to retrospectively examine panoramic radiographs and to determine the prevalence of all types and subtypes of encountered dental anomalies.
Methods: In the last 6 months of 2019, the radiographs of 1266 patients aged between 14 and 70 who applied to a faculty hospital and had panoramic x-rays were analyzed. 5 types as condition, size, number, shape and structure, 21 subtypes in total developmental tooth anomalies such as (Transposition, Ectopy, Inversion, Median diastema, Microdontia, Macrodontia, Hypodontia, Oligodontia, Anadontia, Supernumerary, Meziodens, Talon tubercle (dens evaginatus), Taurodontism, Dilaseration, Gemination, Fusion, Concrescence, Dens in dente (dens invaginatus), Amelogenesis imperfecta, Dentinogenesis imperfecta, Dentin dysplasia) were investigated. Independent sample t-test was used for the mean age, chi-square and Fisher's Exact test were used to evaluate the distribution of anomalies.
Results: Dental anomaly was observed in 27.8% of the patients with a mean age of 36.9 years. The prevalence of anomaly in women (30.3% ) was significantly higher than in men (23.8% ). The prevalence of shape anomaly (68.6% ) and talon tubercle (40.3% ) as a subtype is significantly higher in women. There was no statistically significant difference between other anomaly subtypes and genders. The most common anomalys are talon tubercle (36.1% ), dilaceration (15.3% ), median diastema (12.8% ), single tooth missing (11.9% ), and dens in dente (11.6% ) lower types were found.
Conclusion: As a result of the study, it was seen that there is a possibility of encountering a dental anomaly in one out of every four patients. The importance of taking panoramic radiographs from each patient and examining them in detail has been seen once again.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Dental anomaly, Panoramic radiography, Prevalence

Proje Numarası

yok

Kaynakça

• 1. Asaumi JI, Hisatomi M, Yanagi Y, Unetsubo T, Maki Y, Matsuzaki H, et al. Evaluation of panoramic radiographs taken at the initial visit at a department of paediatric dentistry. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2008;37:340-3.
• 2. Gupta SK, Saxena P, Jain S, Jain D. Prevalence and distribution of selected developmental dental anomalies in an Indian population. J Oral Sci 2011;53:231-8.
• 3. Hall C, Hallett K, Manton D. The association between Cri du chat syndrome and dental anomalies. J Dent Child (Chic) 2014;81:171-7.
• 4. Marques LS, Alcântara CEP, Pereira LJ, Ramos-Jorge ML. Down syndrome: a risk factor for malocclusion severity? Braz Oral Res 2015;29:1-7.
• 5. Afify AR, Zawawi KH. The prevalence of dental anomalies in the Western region of Saudi Arabia. International Scholarly Research Notices 2012.
• 6. Salem G. Prevalence of selected dental anomalies in Saudi children from Gizan region. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 1989;17:162-3.
• 7. Bekiroglu N, Mete S, Ozbay G, Yalcinkaya S, Kargul B. Evaluation of panoramic radiographs taken from 1.056 Turkish children. Niger J Clin Pract 2015;18:8-12.
• 8. Miloglu O, Cakici F, Caglayan F, Yilmaz AB, Demirkaya F. The prevalence of root dilacerations in a Turkish population. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal 2010;15:e441-4.
• 9. Kara MI, Ay S, Aktan AM, Sener I, Bereket C, Ezirganli S, et al. Analysis of different type of transmigrant mandibular teeth. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal 2011;16:e335-40.
• 10. Colak H, Uzgur R, Tan E, Hamidi MM, Turkal M, Colak T. Investigation of prevalence and characteristics of mesiodens in a non-syndromic 11256 dental out patients. Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci 2013;17:2684-9.
• 11. Koc N, Ballikaya E, Cehreli ZC. Prevalence of Premature Eruption and Agenesis of Premolars in Turkish Children: A Retrospective Study. J Clin Pediatr Dent 2021;45:58-62.
• 12. Gündüz K, Celenk P. Survey of talon cusps in the permanent dentition of a Turkish population. J Contemp Dent Pract 2008;9:84-91.
• 13. Topkara A, Sari Z. Prevalence and distribution of hypodontia in a Turkish orthodontic patient population: Results from a large academic cohort. Eur J Paediatr Dent 2011;12:123-7.
• 14. Cantekin K, Dane A, Miloglu O, Kazanci F, Bayrakdar S, Celikoglu M. Prevalence and intra-oral distribution of agenesis of permanent teeth among EasternTurkish children. Eur J Paediatr Dent 2012;13:53-6.
• 15. Özkan G, Toptaş A, Güneri P. The characteristics and occurrence of the talon cusps in Turkish population: a retrospective sample study. Surg Radiol Anat 2016;38:1105-10.
• 16. Bilge NH, Yeşiltepe S, Törenek Ağırman K, Çağlayan F, Bilge OM. Investigation of prevalence of dental anomalies by using digital panoramic radiographs. Folia Morphol (Warsz) 2018;77:323-8.
• 17. Yilmaz HH, Türkkahraman H, Sayin MO. Prevalence of tooth transpositions and associated dental anomalies in a Turkish population. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2005;34:32-5.
• 18. Gokkaya B, Oflezer OG, Ozdil NY, Kargul B. Is there any relationship between hypodontia and hyperdontia with taurodontism, microdontia and macrodontia? A retrospective study. Niger J Clin Pract 2020;23:805-10.
• 19. Bayraktar C, Kırzıoğlu Z. Bir grup Türk çocuk popülasyonunda sendroma bağlı olmayan oligodonti prevalansı. Acta Odontol Turc 2021;38:8-13. 20. Aslan BI, Akarslan ZZ. Teeth number anomalies in permanent dentition among non-syndromic dental patients. Coll Antropol 2013;37:115-20.
• 21. Merrill RG. Occlusal anomalous tubercles on premolars of Alaskan Eskimos and Indians. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1964;17:484-96.
• 22. Oehlers FA, Lee KW, Lee EC. Dens evaginatus (evaginated odontome). Its structure and responses to external stimuli. Dent Pract Dent Rec 1967;17:239-44.
• 23. Davis PJ, Brook AH. The presentation of talon cusp: diagnosis, clinical features, associations and possible aetiology. Br Dent J 1986;160:84-8.
• 24. Hattab FN, Yassin OM, al-Nimri KS. Talon cusp in permanent dentition associated with other dental anomalies: review of literatüre and reports of seven cases. ASDC J Dent Child 1996;63:368-76.
• 25. Gungor HC, Altay N, Kaymaz FF. Pulpal tissue in bilateral talon cusps of primary central incisors: report of a case. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2000;89:231-5.
• 26. Decaup PH, Garot E, Rouas P. Prevalence of talon cusp: Systematic literatüre review, meta-analysis and new scoring system. Arch Oral Biol 2021;125:105-2.
• 27. Kantaputra PN, Kayserili H, Güven Y, Kantaputra W, Balci MC, Tanpaiboon P, et al. Oral manifestations of 17 patients affected with mucopolysaccharidosis type VI. J Inherit Metab Dis 2014;37:263-8.
• 28. Sekerci AE, Cantekin K, Aydinbelge M, Ucar Fİ. Prevalence of dental anomalies in the permanent dentition of children with Down syndrome. J Dent Child (Chic) 2014;81:78-83.
• 29. Oehlers FA. Dens invaginatus (dilated composite odontome). Variations of the invagination process and associated anterior crownforms. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1957;10:1204-18.
• 30. Açıkel H, İbiş S, Şen Tunç E. Primary Fused Teeth and Findings in Permanent Dentition. Med Princ Pract. 2018;27:129-32.
• 31. Gadhia K, McDonald S, Arkutu N, Malik K. Amelogenesis imperfecta: an introduction. Br Dent J 2012;212:377-9.
• 32. Altug-Atac AT, Erdem D. Prevalence and distribution of dental anomalies in orthodontic patients. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2007;131:510-4.