Download PDF
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Eur J Dent 2014; 08(03): 337-341
DOI: 10.4103/1305-7456.137641
Original Article
Dental Investigation Society

Evaluation of tooth number anomalies in a subpopulation of the North-East of Turkey

Muhammet Karadas
1   Department of Restorative Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Recep Tayyip Erdogan University, Rize, Turkiye
,
Mevlut Celikoglu
2   Department of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Akdeniz University, Antalya, Turkiye
,
Mustafa Sadik Akdag
3   Department of Restorative Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Karadeniz Technical University, Trabzon, Turkiye
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
25 September 2019 (online)

  PDF Download Permissions and Reprints

ABSTRACT

Objective: The aim was to evaluate the prevalence and distribution of tooth number anomalies in a Turkish subpopulation. Materials and Methods: A population of 2722 patients (1532 females and 1190 males; mean age, 12.33 ± 2.5 years) was retrospectively examined to determine the prevalence and distribution of the hypodontia, oligodontia, and hyperdontia using panoramic radiographs. All permanent teeth were investigated except thirds molars and the data obtained were recorded as unilateral (left or right) or bilateral according to gender. Pearson's Chi-squared and Fisher exact tests were used for difference comparisons (P < 0.05). Results: Permanent tooth anomalies were found in at least 132 (4.84%) of 2722 patients with no statistically difference between the genders, consists of 4.63% females and 5.12% males. Distribution of hyperdontia was statistically significant difference between genders, whereas distribution of hypodontia and oligodontia was no significant difference between genders. Hypodontia was the most frequently observed anomaly (3.67%), followed by hyperdontia (0.96%), and oligodontia (0.21%). Oligodontia and hypodontia were more frequent in females (3.98% and 0.26%, respectively), whereas hyperdontia was more frequently observed in males (1.68%). Maxillary lateral incisors were most common missing teeth (2.27%), while the frequency of hyperdontia was most common in premolars. Conclusion: The prevalence of teeth number anomalies was 4.84% of dental patients. Maxillary lateral incisors were most common missing teeth, while the frequency of hyperdontia was most common in premolars.

Key words:

Hyperdontia - hypodontia - oligodontia - prevalence
 

  • REFERENCES

  • 1 Winter GB, Brook AH. Enamel hypoplasia and anomalies of the enamel. Dent Clin North Am 1975; 19: 3-24
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Colak H, Uzgur R, Tan E, Hamidi MM, Turkal M, Colak T. Investigation of prevalence and characteristics of mesiodens in a non-syndromic 11256 dental outpatients. Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci 2013; 17: 2684-9
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 White SC, Pharoah MJ. Oral Radiology Principles and Interpretation. 6th ed.. St. Louis: Mosby; 2009: p. 310-65
    Google Scholar
  • 4 Arte S. Phenotypic and genotypic features of familial hypodontia. Thesis, University of Helsinki; 2001
    Google Scholar
  • 5 Mattheeuws N, Dermaut L, Martens G. Has hypodontia increased in Caucasians during the 20th century?. A meta-analysis. Eur J Orthod 2004; 26: 99-103
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Muller TP, Hill IN, Peterson AC, Blayney JR. A survey of congenitally missing permanent teeth. J Am Dent Assoc 1970; 81: 101-7
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Dermaut LR, Goeffers KR, De Smit AA. Prevalence of tooth agenesis correlated with jaw relationship and dental crowding. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1986; 90: 204-10
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Brabant H. Comparison of the characteristics and anomalies of the deciduous and the permanent dentition. J Dent Res 1967; 46: 897-902
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Sykaras SN. Mesiodens in primary and permanent dentitions. Report of a case. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1975; 39: 870-4
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Primosch RE. Anterior supernumerary teeth-assessment and surgical intervention in children. Pediatr Dent 1981; 3: 204-15
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Kazanci F, Celikoglu M, Miloglu O, Ceylan I, Kamak H. Frequency and distribution of developmental anomalies in the permanent teeth of a Turkish orthodontic patient population. J Dent Sci 2011; 6: 82-9
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Sisman Y, Uysal T, Gelgor IE. Hypodontia. Does the prevalence and distribution pattern differ in orthodontic patients?. Eur J Dent 2007; 1: 167-73
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Altug-Atac AT, Erdem D. Prevalence and distribution of dental anomalies in orthodontic patients. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2007; 131: 510-4
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Jukic J, Skrinjaric I, Glavina D, Ulovec Z. The prevalence of oral and dental anomalies in children with developmental disturbances. Acta Stomatol Croat 2002; 36: 79-83
    Google Scholar
  • 15 Kathariya MD, Nikam AP, Chopra K, Patil NN, Raheja H, Kathariya R. Prevalence of dental anomalies among school going children in India. J Int Oral Health 2013; 5: 10-4
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Hattab FN, Yassin OM, al-Nimri KS. Talon cusp-clinical significance and management: Case reports. Quintessence Int 1995; 26: 115-20
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Hua F, He H, Ngan P, Bouzid W. Prevalence of peg-shaped maxillary permanent lateral incisors: A meta-analysis. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2013; 144: 97-109
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Thongudomporn U, Freer TJ. Prevalence of dental anomalies in orthodontic patients. Aust Dent J 1998; 43: 395-8
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Basdra EK, Kiokpasoglou M, Stellzig A. The Class II Division 2 craniofacial type is associated with numerous congenital tooth anomalies. Eur J Orthod 2000; 22: 529-35
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Gupta SK, Saxena P, Jain S, Jain D. Prevalence and distribution of selected developmental dental anomalies in an Indian population. J Oral Sci 2011; 53: 231-8
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Kim YH. Investigation of hypodontia as clinically related dental anomaly: Prevalence and characteristics. ISRN Dent 2011; 2011: 246135
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Trakiniene G, Ryliškyte M, Kiaušaite A. Prevalence of teeth number anomalies in orthodontic patients. Stomatologija 2013; 15: 47-53
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Gábris K, Fábián G, Kaán M, Rózsa N, Tarján I. Prevalence of hypodontia and hyperdontia in paedodontic and orthodontic patients in Budapest. Community Dent Health 2006; 23: 80-2
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Rosenzweig KA, Garbarski D. Numerical aberrations in the permanent teeth of grade school children in Jerusalem. Am J Phys Anthropol 1965; 23: 277-83
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Davis PJ. Hypodontia and hyperdontia of permanent teeth in Hong Kong schoolchildren. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 1987; 15: 218-20
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 al-Emran S. Prevalence of hypodontia and developmental malformation of permanent teeth in Saudi Arabian schoolchildren. Br J Orthod 1990; 17: 115-8
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Lynham A. Panoramic radiographic survey of hypodontia in Australian Defence Force recruits. Aust Dent J 1990; 35: 19-22
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Rølling S. Hypodontia of permanent teeth in Danish schoolchildren. Scand J Dent Res 1980; 88: 365-9
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Fekonja A. Hypodontia in orthodontically treated children. Eur J Orthod 2005; 27: 457-60
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Endo T, Ozoe R, Kubota M, Akiyama M, Shimooka S. A survey of hypodontia in Japanese orthodontic patients. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2006; 129: 29-35
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Nordgarden H, Jensen JL, Storhaug K. Reported prevalence of congenitally missing teeth in two Norwegian counties. Community Dent Health 2002; 19: 258-61
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Rølling S, Poulsen S. Oligodontia in Danish schoolchildren. Acta Odontol Scand 2001; 59: 111-2
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Zhu JF, Marcushamer M, King DL, Henry RJ. Supernumerary and congenitally absent teeth: A literature review. J Clin Pediatr Dent 1996; 20: 87-95
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Rajab LD, Hamdan MA. Supernumerary teeth: Review of the literature and a survey of 152 cases. Int J Paediatr Dent 2002; 12: 244-54
    Google Scholar
  • 35 Van Buggenhout G, Bailleul-Forestier I. Mesiodens. Eur J Med Genet 2008; 51: 178-81
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar