-
BioMed Research International 2017Hypodontia, or tooth agenesis, is the most prevalent craniofacial malformation in humans. It may occur as part of a recognised genetic syndrome or as a nonsyndromic... (Review)
Review
Hypodontia, or tooth agenesis, is the most prevalent craniofacial malformation in humans. It may occur as part of a recognised genetic syndrome or as a nonsyndromic isolated trait. Excluding third molars, the reported prevalence of hypodontia ranges from 1.6 to 6.9%, depending on the population studied. Most affected individuals lack only one or two teeth, with permanent second premolars and upper lateral incisors the most likely to be missing. Both environmental and genetic factors are involved in the aetiology of hypodontia, with the latter playing a more significant role. Hypodontia individuals often present a significant clinical challenge for orthodontists because, in a number of cases, the treatment time is prolonged and the treatment outcome may be compromised. Hence, the identification of genetic and environmental factors may be particularly useful in the early prediction of this condition and the development of prevention strategies and novel treatments in the future.
Topics: Anodontia; Bicuspid; Humans; Incisor; Mandible; Maxilla
PubMed: 28401166
DOI: 10.1155/2017/9378325 -
Folia Morphologica 2018This study was performed to evaluate the prevalence of all types and subtypes of dental anomalies among 6- to 40-year-old patients by using panoramic radiographs.
BACKGROUND
This study was performed to evaluate the prevalence of all types and subtypes of dental anomalies among 6- to 40-year-old patients by using panoramic radiographs.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
This cross-sectional study was conducted by analysing digital panoramic radiographs of 1200 patients admitted to our clinic in 2014. Dental anomalies were examined under 5 types and 16 subtypes. Dental ano-malies were divided into 5 types: (a) number (including hypodontia, oligodontia and hyperdontia); (b) size (including microdontia and macrodontia); (c) structure (including amelogenesis imperfecta, dentinogenesis imperfecta and dentin dys-plasia); (d) position (including transposition, ectopia, displacement, impaction and inversion); (e) shape (including fusion-gemination, dilaceration and taurodontism).
RESULTS
The prevalence of dental anomalies diagnosed by panoramic radiographs was 39.2% (46% in men and 54% in women). Anomalies of position (60.8%) and shape (27.8%) were the most common types of abnormalities and anomalies of size (8.2%), structure (0.2%) and number (17%) were the least in both genders. Anomalies of impaction (45.5%), dilacerations (16.3%), hypodontia (13.8%) and taurodontism (11.2%) were the most common subtypes of dental anomalies. Taurodontism was more common in the age groups of 13-19 years. The age range of the most frequent of all other anomalies was 20-29.
CONCLUSIONS
Anomalies of tooth position were the most common type of dental anomalies and structure anomalies were the least common in this Turkish po-pulation. The frequency and type of dental anomalies vary within and between populations, confirming the role of racial factors in the prevalence of dental ano-malies. Digital panoramic radiography is a very useful method for the detection of dental anomalies. (Folia Morphol 2018; 77, 2: 323-328).
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Anodontia; Child; Cross-Sectional Studies; Dental Pulp Cavity; Female; Humans; Male; Prevalence; Radiography, Panoramic; Tooth Abnormalities; Tooth, Impacted
PubMed: 28933802
DOI: 10.5603/FM.a2017.0087 -
Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics 2022There are different possibilities of orthodontic planning for cases with congenital absence of maxillary lateral incisors. This subject divides the opinion of...
INTRODUCTION
There are different possibilities of orthodontic planning for cases with congenital absence of maxillary lateral incisors. This subject divides the opinion of orthodontists and oral rehabilitation clinicians, due to the advantages and disadvantages of each treatment option, which may involve opening spaces for future implants and/or prosthetic restorations, or closing the spaces by positioning the maxillary canines in the place of lateral incisors. The correct diagnosis and careful evaluation of each patient allow to determine the best therapeutic approach. This paper discusses the main topics to be considered when planning these cases.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the main aspects related to orthodontic treatment planning in cases of congenital absence of maxillary lateral incisors, to aid the decision-making, with clinical and scientific basis.
Topics: Anodontia; Cuspid; Esthetics, Dental; Humans; Incisor; Malocclusion; Maxilla
PubMed: 35674572
DOI: 10.1590/2177-6709.27.1.e22spe1 -
Journal of Medical Case Reports Nov 2019Ectodermal dysplasia is a rare genetic disorder that affects ectodermally derived structures, including teeth, nails, hair, and sweat glands. Hypohidrotic ectodermal...
BACKGROUND
Ectodermal dysplasia is a rare genetic disorder that affects ectodermally derived structures, including teeth, nails, hair, and sweat glands. Hypohidrotic ectodermal dysplasia is the most common type, with oligodontia being the most striking dental feature. Prosthetic rehabilitation in children with ectodermal dysplasia is an important step toward improving their overall quality of life. The fixed prosthesis has the advantages of being more stable in the mouth with good child compliance and a good aesthetic outcome.
CASE PRESENTATION
Our patient was a 5-year-old Middle Eastern boy with oligodontia caused by ectodermal dysplasia. He was managed by fabrication of an upper functional space maintainer and a lower fixed partial denture to restore occlusion, masticatory function, aesthetics, and overall quality of life.
CONCLUSIONS
The use of the fixed prosthesis in children is a new and evolving treatment modality that resolves many of the issues caused by removable prostheses. It accommodates jaw growth in the mandible, reduces the need to remake the prosthesis, and has an overall better aesthetic outcome.
Topics: Adaptation, Physiological; Anodontia; Child, Preschool; Dental Prosthesis; Denture Design; Denture, Partial, Removable; Ectodermal Dysplasia 1, Anhidrotic; Humans; Male; Quality of Life; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 31699141
DOI: 10.1186/s13256-019-2268-4 -
Journal of Dental Research Dec 2022Choosing hypodontia treatment requires young people and parents to consider a large amount of information, identify what is important to them, and make trade-offs...
Choosing hypodontia treatment requires young people and parents to consider a large amount of information, identify what is important to them, and make trade-offs between options. This study aimed to examine young people and parents' preferences for hypodontia treatment using discrete choice experiment (DCE). This was a cross-sectional survey of young people (12-16 y) with hypodontia of any severity, at any stage of treatment, and their parents. Participants were recruited from NHS Hospitals in England and Wales. A bespoke DCE questionnaire was developed to measure preferences for 6 attributes of hypodontia treatment (waiting time, treatment time, problems during treatment, discomfort during treatment, bite, appearance). The questionnaire was completed 1) online by young people and parents, individually or together, and 2) by child-parent dyads under observation. Preferences were analyzed using regression models. In total, 204 participants (122 young people, 56 parents, 26 dyads) completed the online questionnaire and 15 child-parent dyads completed the questionnaire under observation. The most important attribute in hypodontia treatment was improvement in appearance, but significant heterogeneity was found in preferences. Four distinct groups of participants were found: group 1 (39%): severe discomfort and problems were most important; group 2 (31%): most concerned about improvement in appearance of teeth and improvement in bite; group 3 (22%): appearance 3 times more important than any other attribute; and group 4 (9%): preferences difficult to interpret. There was variation in how child-parent dyads approached decision-making, with some negotiating joint preferences, while for others, one individual dominated. Making trade-offs in DCE tasks helped some people think about treatment and identify their preferences. Appearance is an important outcome from hypodontia treatment, but preferences vary and potential risks and functional outcome are also important to some people. There is a notable level of uncertainty in decision-making, which suggests further shared decision support would be valuable.
Topics: Humans; Adolescent; Anodontia; Cross-Sectional Studies; Parents; Surveys and Questionnaires; England; Patient Preference
PubMed: 36271667
DOI: 10.1177/00220345221111386 -
Acta Medica Academica Apr 2020The aim of this study was to assess the prevalence of hypodontia and hyperdontia among a group of orthodontic patients.
OBJECTIVE
The aim of this study was to assess the prevalence of hypodontia and hyperdontia among a group of orthodontic patients.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
This cross sectional study was conducted using radiographs of 4256 patients (2032 males and 2224 females) who attended the Department of Orthodontics, School of Dental Medicine, University of Sarajevo. Radiographs were examined for the prevalence of hypodontia and hyperdontia in permanent dentition. Hypodontia was recorded when a tooth was absent on the panoramic radiograph and hyperdontia was recorded as an increased number of teeth above that described by normal dental formula. All data were analyzed using descriptive statistics including frequency and percentage, and differences between groups were tested using the χ2 test, or Fisher exact test.
RESULTS
In the sample of orthodontic patients, 4.08% subjects had a least one dental anomaly, hypodontia or hyperdontia. The observed prevalence of hypodontia was in 3.42% subjects, and it was more prevalent in females than in male subjects. The observed prevalence of hyperdontia was in 0.65% subjects and hyperdontia was more common in males than female subjects.
CONCLUSIONS
By early diagnosis of a reduced or increased number of teeth, various modes of therapy with a multidisciplinary approach may be performed to correct the aesthetic and functional problems caused by hypodontia or hyperdontia.
Topics: Anodontia; Bosnia and Herzegovina; Cross-Sectional Studies; Dental Care; Female; Humans; Male; Prevalence; Radiography, Panoramic; Tooth, Supernumerary
PubMed: 32738117
DOI: 10.5644/ama2006-124.283 -
American Journal of Orthodontics and... Feb 2018Identification and appraisal of the outcome measures that have been used to evaluate hypodontia treatment and deliver services are essential for improving care. A lack... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Identification and appraisal of the outcome measures that have been used to evaluate hypodontia treatment and deliver services are essential for improving care. A lack of alignment between outcomes and patient values can limit the scope for patient-centered care. Our objectives were to identify and appraise the outcomes selected to evaluate hypodontia care.
METHODS
Data sources included 10 electronic databases and grey literature, searched using terms for hypodontia and its treatment methods. Study eligibility included mixed study designs to ensure comprehensive identification of outcomes, excluding case reports and case series with fewer than 10 participants and nonsystematic reviews. Participants and interventions involved people with hypodontia receiving any dental treatment to manage their hypodontia. Simulated treatment, purely laboratory-based interventions, and future treatments still in development were excluded. Research outcomes were identified and synthesised into 4 categories: clinical indicators, and patient-reported, clinician-reported, and lay-reported outcomes. No synthesis of efficacy data was planned, and consequently no methodologic quality appraisal of the studies was undertaken.
RESULTS
The search identified 497 abstracts, from which 106 eligible articles were retrieved in full. Fifty-six studies and 8 quality-improvement reports were included. Clinical indicators were reported in 49 studies (88%) including appearance, function, dental health, treatment longevity, treatment success and service delivery. Patient-reported outcomes were given in 22 studies (39%) including oral health-related quality of life, appearance, function, symptoms of temporomandibular dysfunction, and patient experience. Clinician-reported outcomes were limited to appearance. Variability was seen in the tools used for measuring outcomes.
CONCLUSIONS
There is a lack of rationale and consistency in the selection of outcome measures used to evaluate hypodontia care. Outcomes are largely clinician and researcher-driven with little evidence of their relevance to patients. There was a paucity of outcomes measuring access to care, quality of care, and cost. Evidence from hypodontia research is clinician-focused and likely to have limited value to support patients during decision making. Attempts to synthesise the evidence base for translation into practice will be challenging. There is a need for a core outcomes set with a patient-centric approach to drive improvements in health services.
Topics: Anodontia; Dental Care; Humans; Quality Assurance, Health Care; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 29407495
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2017.10.010 -
Anales de Pediatria Jun 2020
Topics: Anodontia; Child; Humans; Male
PubMed: 30982737
DOI: 10.1016/j.anpedi.2019.03.002 -
Clinical Oral Investigations Jul 2016In this cross-sectional study, we aimed to investigate the pattern of hypodontia in the Dutch population and determine the association between hypodontia and dental...
OBJECTIVES
In this cross-sectional study, we aimed to investigate the pattern of hypodontia in the Dutch population and determine the association between hypodontia and dental development in children with and without hypodontia, applying three different standards, Dutch, French Canadian, and Belgian, to estimate dental age.
METHODS
We used dental panoramic radiographs (DPRs) of 1488 children (773 boys and 715 girls), with a mean age of 9.76 years (SD = 0.24) participating in a population-based cohort study in Rotterdam, the Netherlands, born in 2002-2004, and 452 children (219 boys and 233 girls) with a mean age of 9.83 years (SD = 1.09) participating in a mixed-longitudinal, interdisciplinary population-based cohort study in Nijmegen, the Netherlands born in 1960-1968.
RESULTS
The prevalence of hypodontia in the Generation R Study was 5.6 % (N = 84) and 5.1 % (N = 23) in the Nijmegen Growth Study. Linear regression analysis showed that children with hypodontia had a 0.37 [95 % CI (-0.53,-0.21)] to 0.52 [95 % CI (-0.76,-0.38)] years lower dental age than children without hypodontia. The ordinal regression analysis showed a delay in development of mandibular second premolars [1.68 years; 95 %CI (-1.90,-1.46)], mandibular first premolars [0.57 years; 95 % CI (-0.94,-0.20)], and mandibular second molars [0.47 years; 95 % CI (-0.84,-0.11)].
CONCLUSION
These findings suggest that children with hypodontia have a delayed dental development.
CLINICAL RELEVANCE
The delay of dental development in children with hypodontia should be taken into consideration and therefore orthodontists should recognize that a later start of treatment in these patients may be necessary.
Topics: Anodontia; Child; Cross-Sectional Studies; Female; Humans; Longitudinal Studies; Male; Netherlands; Odontogenesis; Prevalence; Radiography, Panoramic
PubMed: 26462655
DOI: 10.1007/s00784-015-1622-1 -
Genes Jan 2023(1) Background: Hypodontia has a multifactorial aetiology, in which genetic factors are a major component. Associated with this congenital absence, the formed teeth may...
(1) Background: Hypodontia has a multifactorial aetiology, in which genetic factors are a major component. Associated with this congenital absence, the formed teeth may show differences in size and shape, which may vary with the specific genetic variants and with the location of the missing teeth. The aims of the present study were to investigate a specific variant of , derive morphometric tooth measurements in a sample of patients with isolated maxillary lateral incisor agenesis and matched controls, and model the findings. (2) Methods: Genotyping of the rs8670 genetic variant and morphometric measurements with a 2D image analysis method were performed for 26 hypodontia patients and 26 matched controls. (3) Results: The risk of upper lateral incisor agenesis was 6.9 times higher when the T allele was present. The morphometric parameters showed significant differences between hypodontia patients and controls and between the unilateral and bilateral agenesis cases. The most affected crown dimension in the hypodontia patients was the bucco-lingual dimension. In crown shape there was significant variation the Carabelli trait in upper first molars. (4) Conclusions: The rs8670 variant was associated with variations in morphological outcomes. The new findings for compensatory interactions between the maxillary incisors indicate that epigenetic and environmental factors interact with this genetic variant. A single-level directional complex interactive network model incorporates the variations seen in this study.
Topics: Humans; Anodontia; Incisor; Tooth Loss; Phenotype; Alleles
PubMed: 36672972
DOI: 10.3390/genes14010231