Quantcast

Taurodontism, Root Dilaceration, and Tooth Transposition: A Radiographic Study of a Population with Nonsyndromic Cleft Lip and/or Palate.

Research paper by Giovana Maria GM Weckwerth, Carlos F CF Santos, Daniel T DT Brozoski, Bruna S BS Centurion, Otávio O Pagin, José Roberto P JR Lauris, Izabel Maria M IM Carvalho, Lucimara T LT Neves

Indexed on: 08 Aug '15Published on: 08 Aug '15Published in: The Cleft palate-craniofacial journal : official publication of the American Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Association



Abstract

  In an effort to contribute to proper dental planning and define possible dental phenotypes of nonsyndromic cleft lip and/or palate (CL/P), this study aimed to investigate the occurrence of taurodontism, root dilaceration, and tooth transposition in persons with nonsyndromic CL/P, specifically analyzing the differences among gender, cleft types, and the most affected teeth.  This retrospective study analyzed 974 panoramic x-rays from nonsyndromic Brazilians older than 16 years and categorized into the following four groups: group 1, 250 persons with unilateral cleft lip and palate; group 2, 250 persons with unilateral cleft lip; group 3, 224 persons with cleft palate; and a control group of 250 persons without clefts. Radiographs were digitalized with a scanner and analyzed.  In the Brazilian population studied, the prevalence of taurodontism was 60.4% in group 1, 62.4% in group 2, 67.0% in group 3, and 42.8% in the control group. Root dilacerations had a prevalence of 31.2% in group 1, 29.6% in group 2, 26.3% in group 3, and 27.2% in the control group. The teeth most affected by taurodontism were 17 and 27; whereas root dilacerations were most common in teeth 38 and 48. No tooth transpositions were found in any radiograph analyzed.  Taurodontism is significantly more prevalent in Brazilians with nonsyndromic CL/P than in persons without clefts; whereas the prevalence of root dilaceration no different from that in the control group. However, root dilacerations in anterior teeth were higher in groups 1 and 2 than in the control group.

More like this: