Conflict of interest - Effects of Orthodontic Tooth Movement on Alveolar Bone Density

No authors of this study have any financial and personal relationships with other people or organizations, which could result in an inappropriate influence of this study.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62

References

1. Noda K, Nakamura Y, Kogure K, Nomura Y (2009) Morphological changes in the rat periodontal ligament and its vascularity after experimental tooth movement using superelastic forces. Eur J Orthod 31:37-45

2. Garat JA, Gordillo ME, Ubios AM (2005) Bone response to different strength orthodontic forces in animals with periodontitis. J Periodontal Res 40:441-445

3. Melsen B (2001) Tissue reaction to orthodontic tooth movement--a new paradigm. Eur J Orthod 23:671-681

4. Cattaneo PM, Dalstra M, Melsen B (2005) The finite element method: a tool to study orthodontic tooth movement. J Dent Res 84:428-433

5. Verna C, Zaffe D, Siciliani G (1999) Histomorphometric study of bone reactions during orthodontic tooth movement in rats. Bone 24:371-379

6. Roberts WE, Roberts JA, Epker BN, Burr DB, Hartsfield JK (2006) Remodeling of Mineralized Tissues, Part I: The Frost Legacy. Sem Orthod 12:216-237

7. Roberts WE, Epker BN, Burr DB, Hartsfield JK, Roberts JA (2006) Remodeling of Mineralized Tissues, Part II: Control and Pathophysiology. Sem Orthod 12:238-253

8. Meikle MC (2006) The tissue, cellular, and molecular regulation of orthodontic tooth movement: 100 years after Carl Sandstedt. Eur J Orthod 28:221-240

9. Melsen B (1999) Biological reaction of alveolar bone to orthodontic tooth movement. Angle Orthod 69:151-158

10. Reitan K, Kvam E (1971) Comparative behavior of human and animal tissue during experimental tooth movement. Angle Orthod 41:1-14

11. Rygh P (1973) Ultrastructural changes in pressure zones of human periodontium incident to orthodontic tooth movement. Acta Odontol Scand 31:109-122

12. Jager A, Radlanski RJ, Taufall D, Klein C, Steinhofel N, Doler W (1990) Quantitative determination of alveolar bone density using digital image analysis of microradiographs.

Anat Anz 170:171-179

13. Choel L, Duboeuf F, Bourgeois D, Briguet A, Lissac M (2003) Trabecular alveolar bone in the human mandible: a dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry study. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 95:364-370

14. Al Haffar I, Padilla F, Nefussi R, Kolta S, Foucart JM, Laugier P (2006) Experimental evaluation of bone quality measuring speed of sound in cadaver mandibles. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 102:782-791

15. Chen WP, Hsu JT, Chang CH (2003) Determination of Young’s modulus of cortical bone directly from computed tomography: a rabbit model. J Chin Inst Eng 22:121-128

16. Homolka P, Beer A, Birkfellner W, Nowotny R, Gahleitner A, Tschabitscher M, Bergmann H (2002) Bone mineral density measurement with dental quantitative CT prior to dental implant placement in cadaver mandibles: pilot study. Radiology 224:247-252

17. Aranyarachkul P, Caruso J, Gantes B, Schulz E, Riggs M, Dus I, Yamada JM, Crigger M

(2005) Bone density assessments of dental implant sites: 2. Quantitative cone-beam computerized tomography. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 20:416-424

18. Bridges T, King G, Mohammed A (1988) The effect of age on tooth movement and mineral density in the alveolar tissues of the rat. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 93:245-250

19. Hsu JT, Chang HW, Huang HL, Yu JH, Li YF, Tu MG Bone density changes around teeth during orthodontic treatment. Clinical oral investigations Online publication

20. Toms SR, Eberhardt AW (2003) A nonlinear finite element analysis of the periodontal ligament under orthodontic tooth loading. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 123:657-665 21. Fuh LJ, Huang HL, Chen CS, Fu KL, Shen YW, Tu MG, Shen WC, Hsu JT (2010)

Variations in bone density at dental implant sites in different regions of the jawbone. J Oral Rehabil 37:346-351

22. Norton MR, Gamble C (2001) Bone classification: an objective scale of bone density using the computerized tomography scan. Clin Oral Implants Res 12:79-84

23. Turkyilmaz I, Tozum TF, Tumer C (2007) Bone density assessments of oral implant sites using computerized tomography. J Oral Rehabil 34:267-272

24. Cann CE (1988) Quantitative CT for determination of bone mineral density: a review.

Radiology 166:509-522

25. Mozzo P, Procacci C, Tacconi A, Martini PT, Andreis IA (1998) A new volumetric CT machine for dental imaging based on the cone-beam technique: preliminary results. Eur Radiol 8:1558-1564

26. Hua Y, Nackaerts O, Duyck J, Maes F, Jacobs R (2009) Bone quality assessment based on cone beam computed tomography imaging. Clin Oral Implants Res 20:767-771

27. Draenert FG, Coppenrath E, Herzog P, Muller S, Mueller-Lisse UG (2007) Beam hardening artefacts occur in dental implant scans with the NewTom cone beam CT but not with the dental 4-row multidetector CT. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 36:198-203

28. Katsumata A, Hirukawa A, Okumura S, Naitoh M, Fujishita M, Ariji E, Langlais RP (2007) Effects of image artifacts on gray-value density in limited-volume cone-beam computerized tomography. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 104:829-836

29. Katsumata A, Hirukawa A, Noujeim M, Okumura S, Naitoh M, Fujishita M, Ariji E, Langlais RP (2006) Image artifact in dental cone-beam CT. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 101:652-657

30. Lagravere MO, Carey J, Ben-Zvi M, Packota GV, Major PW (2008) Effect of object location on the density measurement and Hounsfield conversion in a NewTom 3G cone beam computed tomography unit. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 37:305-308

31. Naitoh M, Hirukawa A, Katsumata A, Ariji E (2009) Evaluation of voxel values in mandibular cancellous bone: relationship between cone-beam computed tomography and multislice helical computed tomography. Clin Oral Implants Res 20:503-506

32. Frost HM (1991) Some ABC's of skeletal pathophysiology. 7. Tissue mechanisms controlling bone mass. Calcif Tissue Int 49:303-304

33. Epker BN, Frost HM (1965) Correlation of Bone Resorption and Formation with the

Physical Behavior of Loaded Bone. J Dent Res 44:33-41

34. Cardaropoli D, Gaveglio L (2007) The influence of orthodontic movement on periodontal tissues level. Sem Orthod 13:234-245

35. Roberts WE (1988) Bone tissue interface. J Dent Educ 52:804-809

36. Misch CE, Bidez MW, Sharawy M (2001) A bioengineered implant for a predetermined bone cellular response to loading forces. A literature review and case report. J Periodontol 72:1276-1286

37. Meghji S (1992) Bone remodelling. Br Dent J 172:235-242

38. Roberts WE, Helm FR, Marshall KJ, Gongloff RK (1989) Rigid endosseous implants for orthodontic and orthopedic anchorage. Angle Orthod 59:247-256

39. Dao V, Renjen R, Prasad HS, Rohrer MD, Maganzini AL, Kraut RA (2009) Cementum, pulp, periodontal ligament, and bone response after direct injury with orthodontic anchorage screws: a histomorphologic study in an animal model. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 67:2440-2445 40. van Oers RF, Ruimerman R, Tanck E, Hilbers PA, Huiskes R (2008) A unified theory for

osteonal and hemi-osteonal remodeling. Bone 42:250-259

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62

TABLE LEGENDS

Table 1. Alveolar bone densities (in Hounsfield units) on four sides of the teeth before and after 7 months of orthodontic treatment in patient #5.

Table 2. Percentage changes in the alveolar bone density on four sides of the tooth between before and after 7 months of orthodontic treatment in patient #5. The directions of tooth

movement are also listed.

Table 3. Coincidence percentages for all tooth movements and for those larger than 0.5 mm in the eight patients.

Table 4. Coincidence percentages for all tooth movements and for those larger than 0.5 mm at different levels in the eight patients.

Table 5. Coincidence percentages for all tooth movements and for those larger than 0.5 mm on different sides in the eight patients.

FIGURE LEGENDS

Figure 1. Schematic of the three levels at which the root of the upper-left canine and the surrounding bone were sectioned. CEJ, cementoenamel junction.

Figure 2. Steps involved in measuring the bone density around the upper-left canine in the middle slice at the intermediate level in patient #2: (a) segmenting the area of the tooth from the CBCT image using the threshold value of the cementum; (b) expanding by 1 voxel (250 μm) to include the PDL; (c) expanding by a further 3 voxels (750 μm) to include the surrounding bone; (d) subtracting the tooth and PDL from the tooth, PDL, and surrounding bone; and (e) dividing the surrounding bone into four regions: palatal, distal, mesial, and buccal sides. The volumes of the areas (unit: mm³) and their densities (unit: bone density in grayscale values in the CBCT image) are also indicated.

Figure 3. Occlusal photographs of the maxilla of patient #5 before treatment (a) and after treatment (b). (c), (d) Superimposed models before (red) and after (green) treatments: overall view (c) and closer view (d).

Table 1. Alveolar bone densities (in Hounsfield units) on four sides of the teeth before and after 7 months of orthodontic treatment in patient #5.

Tooth Level

Before orthodontic treatment After 7 months of orthodontic

Buccal Palatal Mesial Distal Average Buccal Palatal Mesial Distal Average

UR3 UR3: upper-right canine; UR2: upper-right lateral incisor; UR1: upper-right incisor

UL1: upper-left incisor; UL2: upper-left lateral incisor; UL3: upper-left canine C: cervical; M: intermediate; A: apical

Table 2. Percentage changes in the alveolar bone density on four sides of the tooth between before and after 7 months of orthodontic treatment in patient #5. The directions of tooth movement are also

listed.

B: buccal side; P: palatal side; M: mesial side ; D: distal side 1

Table 3. Coincidence percentages for all tooth movements and for those larger than 0.5 mm in the eight patients.

Patient # Samples with any tooth movement Samples with tooth movement >0.5 mm

1 72.2% (13/18) 77.8% (7/9)

2 61.1% (11/18) 54.5% (6/11)

3 61.1% (11/18) 87.5% (7/8)

4 55.6% (10/18) 54.5% (6/11)

5 50.0% (9/18) 66.7% (8/12)

6 55.6% (10/18) 60.0% (6/10)

7 66.7% (12/18) 80.0% (8/10)

8 50.0% (9/18) 80.0% (8/10)

Total 59.0% (85/144) 69.1% (56/81)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62

Table 4. Coincidence percentages for all tooth movements and for those larger than 0.5 mm at different levels in the eight patients.

Level Samples with any tooth movement Samples with tooth movement >0.5 mm

Apical 62.5% (30/48) 76.9% (20/26)

Intermediate 62.5% (30/48) 69.2% (18/26)

Cervical 52.1% (25/48) 64.3% (18/28)

Total 59.0% (85/144) 69.1% (56/81)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62

Table 5. Coincidence percentages for all tooth movements and for those larger than 0.5 mm on different sides in the eight patients.

Side Samples with any tooth movement Samples with tooth movement >0.5 mm

Buccal 58.3% (21/36) 65.2% (15/23)

Palatal 52.6% (20/38) 59.1% (13/22)

Mesial 67.4% (31/46) 90.5% (19/21)

Distal 54.2% (13/24) 60.0% (9/15)

Total 59.0% (85/144) 69.1% (56/81)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62

Figure 1. Schematic of the three levels at which the root of the upper-left canine and the surrounding bone were sectioned. CEJ, cementoenamel junction.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62

the tooth and PDL from the tooth, PDL, and surrounding bone; and (e) dividing the surrounding bone into four regions: palatal, distal, mesial, and buccal sides. The volumes of the areas (unit: mm³)

and their densities (unit: bone density in grayscale values in the CBCT image) are also indicated.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62

Figure 3. Occlusal photographs of the maxilla of patient #5 before treatment (a) and after treatment (b). (c), (d) Superimposed models before (red) and after (green) treatments: overall view (c) and

closer view (d).

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62

在文檔中 Effects of Orthodontic Tooth Movement on Alveolar Bone Density (頁 23-35)