The comparison between the posterior mandibular dimensions in patients with mandibular third molar classifications using radiographic measurements
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
The aim of the research was to compare the mean measurements of the ramal height and gonial angle among the groups of third molar classified by Pell and Gregory’s and Winter’s classification. The measurements were done on the panoramic radiographs that included third molars on both sides of 338 patients, ages between 18-30 years. The samples were grouped into class, depth and angulations of the third molar. The comparisons of ramal height and gonial angle among each group were done using Kruskal Wallis test and one-way ANOVA. The average ramal height was 38.6 ± 4.16 millimeters. The average gonial angle was 121.8 ± 7.58 degrees. The third molars in class II, depth A and mesioangular positions were most commonly observed. The comparative analysis found the ramal heights and gonial angles were not different among the groups of the third molar classified by Pell and Gregory’s and Winter’s classification.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
The opinions and content expressed in the articles are solely those of the individual authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the journal or the authors’ affiliated institutions. Authors are fully responsible for the accuracy and correctness of their work.
Any reuse, reproduction, or redistribution of the articles, content, data, or images in other forms requires prior written permission from the Thai Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery
References
Capelli J Jr. Mandibular growth and third molar impaction in extraction cases. Angle Orthod. 1991;61:223-9.
Jeevitha JY, Thiagarajan A, Sivalingam B. Influence and impact of mandibular ramal dimensions on the incidence of lower third Molar impaction: a prospective study. J Pharm Bioallied Sci. 2022;14:364-8.
Al-Gunaid TH, Bukhari AK, El Khateeb SM, Yamaki M. Relationship of mandibular ramus dimensions to lower third molar impaction. Eur J Dent. 2019;13:213-21.
Richardson ME. The etiology and prediction of mandibular third molar impaction. Angle Orthod. 1977;47:165-72.
Barone S, Antonelli A, Averta F, Diodati F, Muraca D, Bennardo F, et al. Does mandibular gonial angle influence the eruption pattern of the lower third molar? A three -dimensional study. J Clin Med. 2021;10:4057.
Gümrükçü Z, Balaban E, Karabağ M. Is there a relationship between third-molar impaction types and the dimensional/angular measurement values of posterior mandible according to Pell & Gregory/Winter classification? Oral Radiol.2021;37:29-35.
Kugelberg CF. Periodontal healing two and four years after impacted lower third molar surgery. A comparative retrospective study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1990;19:341-5.
Carvalho RW, do Egito Vasconcelos BC. Assessment of factors associated with surgical difficulty during removal of impacted lower third molars. J Oral Maxillofac Surg.2011;69:2714-21.
Kugelberg CF, Ahlström U, Ericson S, Hugoson A, Kvint S.Periodontal healing after impacted lower third molar surgery in adolescents and adults. A prospective study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1991;20:18-24.
Broadbent BH, The influence of the third molars on the alignment of the teeth. Am J Orthod Oral Surg. 1943;29:312-30.
Björk AJE, Palling M. Mandibular growth and third molar impaction. Acta Odont Scand. 1956;14:231-71.
Mattila K, Altonen M, Haavikko K. Determination of the gonial angle from the orthopantomogram. Angle Orthod.1977;47:107-10.
Bhullar MK, Uppal AS, Kochhar GK, Chachra S, Kochhar AS.Comparison of gonial angle determination from cephalograms and orthopantomogram. Indian J Dent. 2014;5:123-6.
Radhakrishnan PD, Sapna Varma NK, Ajith VV. Dilemma of gonial angle measurement: panoramic radiograph or lateral cephalogram. Imaging Sci Dent. 2017;47:93-7.
Lemes CR, Tozzi CF, Gribl S, Gribel BF, Venezian GC, do Carmo Menezes C, et al. Mandibular ramus height and condyle distance asymmetries in individuals with different facial growth patterns: a cone-beam computed tomography study. Surg Radiol Anat. 2021;43:267-74.
Riddle PC, Nickel JC, Liu Y, Gonzalez YM, Gallo LM, Conley RS, et al. Mechanobehavior and mandibular ramus length in different facial phenotypes. Angle Orthod. 2020;90:866-72.
Ahila SC, Sasikala C, Kumar BM, Tah R, Abinaya K. Evaluation of the correlation of ramus height, gonial angle, and dental height with different facial forms in individuals with deep bite disorders. Ann Med Health Sci Res. 2016;6:232-8.
Hattab FN, Alhaija ES. Radiographic evaluation of mandibular third molar eruption space. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 1999;88:285-91.
Björk A, Skieller V. Facial development and tooth eruption.An implant study at the age of puberty. Am J Orthod. 1972;62:339-83.
Björk A, Skieller V. Normal and abnormal growth of the mandible. A synthesis of longitudinal cephalometric implant studies over a period of 25 years. Eur J Orthod. 1983;5:1-46.
Demirel O, Akbulut A. Evaluation of the relationship between gonial angle and impacted mandibular third molar teeth. Anat Sci Int. 2020;95:134-42.
Costello BJ, Rivera RD, Shand J, Mooney M. Growth and development considerations for craniomaxillofacial surgery.Oral Maxillofac Surg Clin North Am. 2012;24:377-96.
Bastir M, Rosas A, O’higgins P. Craniofacial levels and the morphological maturation of the human skull. J Anat. 2006;209:637-54.
Rabea AA. Recent advances in understanding theories of eruption (evidence based review article). Future Dent J.2018;4:189-96.
Bastos VC, Gomez RS, Gomes CC. Revisiting the human dental follicle: from tooth development to its association with unerupted or impacted teeth and pathological changes. Dev Dyn. 2022;251:408-23.
Roberts GJ, Lucas VS, Andiappan M, McDonald F. Dental age estimation: pattern recognition of root canal widths of mandibular molars. A novel mandibular maturity marker at the 18-Year threshold. J Forensic Sci. 2017;62:351-4.
Leversha J, McKeough G, Myrteza A, Skjellrup-Wakefiled H, Welsh J, Sholapurkar A. Age and gender correlation of gonial angle, ramus height and bigonial width in dentate subjects in a dental school in Far North Queensland. J Clin Exp Dent. 2016;8:e49-54.
Upadhyay RB, Upadhyay J, Agrawal P, Rao NN. Analysis of gonial angle in relation to age, gender, and dentition status by radiological and anthropometric methods. J Forensic Dent Sci. 2012;4:29-33.
Jensen E, Palling M, Mass B. The gonial angle. Am J Orthod.1954;40:120-33