Arciniega RNA, Ballesteros LM, Meléndez OA

Language: Spanish
References: 10
Page: 33-37
PDF size: 294.24 Kb.

ABSTRACT

The purpose of this study was to determine if skeletal age, dental age and chronological age agreed in 41 subjects. The orthodontist not only needs to know the patient’s chronological age, but also he must know what percentage of growth can be expected in one or two years treatment time. This information is obtained by assessing the skeletal age with hand-wrist radiographs, but there are other aids of diagnosis such as the panoramic X-ray on which dental age can be assessed, so that the clinician has two aids for a more comprehensive diagnosis. Unfortunately although these methods are widely commented in Literature in the clinical practice they are not considered that much. In order to evaluate the skeletal age, we used Fishman’s method in the hand-wrist radiograph and to assess dental age, Dermirjian’s method in the panoramic X-ray was used. t test was used to determine the significant differences between the variables and it was applied to a test of analysis of variance (ANOVA). The results suggest exist statistically significant differences between the skeletal age and the dental age, between the dental age and the chronological age, as well as between the skeletal age and the chronological age. In correlation terms it is only observed very little correlation between the chronological age and the dental age.

REFERENCES

1. García FP, Torre H, Flores L, Rea J. The cervical vertebrae as maturational indicators. J Clin Orthod. 1998; 32 (4): 221-225.

2. Daniel J, Subtenly. Early orthodontic treatment. USA. Ed. Quintessence Publishing, Co. Inc. 2000; 265-267, 269-270.

3. Krailassiri S, Anuwongnukroh N, Dechkunakorn S. Relationship between dental calcification stages and skeletal maturity indicators in thai individuals. Angle Orthod. 2002; 72: 155-166.

4. Demirjian A, Buschang PH, Tanguay R, Patterson DK. Interrelationships among measures of somatic, skeletal, dental, and sexual maturity. Am J Orthod. 1985; 88: 433-438.

5. Silveira AM, Fishman LS, Subtelny JD, Kassebaum DK. Facial growth during adolescence in early, average and late maturers. Angle Orthod. 1992; 62: 185-190.

6. Valverde R, Adriazola M, Meneses A. Correlación entre estadios de calcificación de caninos y segundas premolares mandibulares con la curva de crecimiento puberal maxilar y mandibular. Rev Estomatol Herediana 2004; 14 (1-2): 12-17.

7. Kanbur NO. The relationships between dental age, chronological age and bone age in Turkish adolescents with constitutional delay of growth. J Pediatr Endocrinol Metab. 2006; 19 (8): 979-985.

8. Sierra AM. Assessment of dental and skeletal maturity. A new approach. Angle Orthod. 1987; 57 (3): 194-208.

9. Wartmann C. Calcification of mandibular third molar and its relation to skeletal and chronological age in children. Child Dev. 1956; 27: 459-473.

10. Tancan U. Relationship between dental and skeletal maturity in Turkish subjects. Angle Orthod. 2004; 74 (5): 657-664.