ISSN: 1899-0967
Polish Journal of Radiology
Established by prof. Zygmunt Grudziński in 1926 Sun
Current issue Archive Manuscripts accepted About the journal Editorial board Abstracting and indexing Contact Instructions for authors Ethical standards and procedures
SCImago Journal & Country Rank
 
1/2022
vol. 87
 
Share:
Share:
more
 
 
Head and neck radiology
Original paper

Evaluation of root resorption in maxillary anterior teeth during orthodontic treatment with a fixed appliance based on panoramic radiographs

Karolina Futyma-Gąbka
1
,
Ingrid Różyło-Kalinowska
1
,
Magdalena Piskórz
1
,
Emanuela Bis
2
,
Wiktoria Borek
2

1.
Department of Dental and Maxillofacial Radiodiagnostics, Medical University of Lublin, Poland
2.
Student Research Group at the Department of Dental and Maxillofacial Radiodiagnostics, Medical University of Lublin, Poland
© Pol J Radiol 2022; 87: e545-e548
Online publish date: 2022/10/05
Article file
- Evaluation.pdf  [0.15 MB]
Get citation
ENW
EndNote
BIB
JabRef, Mendeley
RIS
Papers, Reference Manager, RefWorks, Zotero
AMA
APA
Chicago
Harvard
MLA
Vancouver
 
PlumX metrics:
 

Introduction

Root resorption is a gradual loss of the dentin and cementum, inevitably leading to its atrophy [1]. The roots of teeth then become shorter and thinner. The fibres that hold the tooth in the bone are also damaged, which causes a significant increase in mobility and results in possible tooth loss. While in the case of deciduous teeth, root resorption is an appropriate situation that allows the child to replace the milk teeth with permanent ones, in adults it is considered a pathological process. Based on the location, tooth resorption is divided into internal, external, and external-internal. External resorption can be classified into 5 different types [2,3]. One of them is external inflammatory apical root resorption, which can be caused by orthodontic treatment. In 1988 Levander and Malmgren proposed a classification considering the degree of root length loss (Table 1) [4].

Table 1

Levander and Malmgren classification of root resorption

0No signs of resorption
1Irregularity in the apical root shape
2Resorption less than 2 mm of the root length
3Resorption from 2 mm up to 1/3 of the root length
4Severe root resorption above 1/3 of the root length

The risk of orthodontically induced external apical root resorption (OIEARR) is significant, and it depends on many aspects like type of malocclusion, treatment method, duration of the treatment, or systemic diseases [5-7]. Dentists and especially orthodontists should be aware of the danger and monitor the length of the tooth roots in order to respond appropriately or stop the treatment when necessary. A study performed by Remigton et al. [8] showed in long-term evaluation that resorption does not progress significantly after the end of treatment. Root resorption is usually detected accidentally during routine radiological examination.

The aim of this investigation was to evaluate the frequency of apical root resorption in the anterior teeth of the maxilla visible on panoramic images during ortho-dontic treatment with a fixed appliance according to Levander and Malmgren classification.

Material and methods

A total of 194 panoramic radiographs of patients with a fixed appliance in the upper arch were obtained from the database of the Department of Dental and Maxillofacial Radiodiagnostics of the Medical University of Lublin. Then, all the images were analysed by 2 independent observers to evaluate the occurrence and severity of root resorption in maxillary incisors and canines during ortho-dontic treatment, in its final stages. All examinations were taken with a VistaVoxS Panoramic Unit (Dürr Dental, Germany). Age, gender, and the number and name of teeth with external root resorption were collected. The research group included 135 females and 59 males, aged 15-28 years with a mean 20.6 years. The degree of root resorption was assessed according to the Levander and Malmgren classification.

Results

Considering all examined panoramic images, there were 146 patients with variable stages of root resorption (75.26%). In the group of females, we found that 103 patients had external resorption (76.29%) that was slightly higher than the findings in the group of men (72.88%). Age was not found to be a significant factor in our study.

Among 1164 evaluated anterior teeth, 469 showed signs of resorption (40.3%). The number of teeth with different degrees of root destruction is shown in Table 2. The tooth most frequently affected by resorptive changes was the right central upper incisor [11]. Figure 1 shows a panoramic radiograph with visible resorption of maxillary incisors (III and IV stage). The most common stage of root resorption was stage II (53.09%) according to Levander classification. The fourth stage was the least common (2.99%), and 78.57% of the teeth with this stage were central incisors.

Table 2

Number of teeth with root resorption at different stages according to Levander and Malmgren classification.

StageTooth
131211212223
I0283226251
II125455526115
III4202322205
IV015611
Figure 1

Panoramic radiograph with visible external apical root resorption of upper incisors due to orthodontic treatment

/f/fulltexts/PJR/48033/PJR-87-48033-g001_min.jpg

Discussion

Root resorption can be diagnosed on periapical radiographs [9,10], panoramic images [11,12], or cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) [13]. The most common radiological examinations use in diagnosing and planning in orthodontics are panoramic radiographs and cephalograms [14]. Panoramic radiograph has a lot of advantages, including visibility of the entire dental arch and lower doses of radiation in comparison with CBCT. However, it also has some limitations, like overlapping different anatomical structures or magnification of the image. A study comparing panoramic and periapical radiographs in detecting external root resorption showed that on panoramic radiographs the stage of root resorption is significantly higher [10]. The authors suggested that it might be caused by magnification of the image, which is 20-35% on average. A similar study concluded that periapical images are more efficient in the assessment of the root shape and level of resorption [15]. CBCT seems to be the most precise radiological examination due to the possibility of 3-dimensional evaluation. There are many studies that show predominance of CBCT over different radiological tools in root resorption assessment [16,17]. However, following the rule ALARA (as low as reasonably achievable) it is necessary to avoid an additional radiation exposure, and panoramic images seem to be sufficient for detecting and diagnosing external root resorption.

Janson et al. [18] presented a study that evaluated apical resorption by use of periapical radiographs after treatment with 3 different fixed appliance techniques; the results showed that in the whole sample the most frequently affected teeth were upper central incisors, which coincides with our research, but it is not with the agreement with previous studies that indicated that lateral incisors have a greater predisposition to resorptive changes [19-21]. Jiang et al. [22], in a study performed using panoramic radiographs, found that central incisors were the primarily resorbed teeth, which is compatible with our results. According to Elhaddaoui et al. [23], root resorption after orthodontic treatment measured on panoramic radiograph is usually lower than 2.5 mm with less than a 20% chance of severe resorption. In our study the most common type of external root resorption was a second degree according to Levander and Malmgren. There were 361 teeth with stage I or II RR, which means that 77% of examined teeth had a root destruction up to 2 mm. This is in agreement with the study of Elhaddaoui [23]. The Authors claim that severe root resorption mainly concerns maxillary lateral incisors, which contrasts with our finding that 78.57% of stage IV (with resorption above 1/3 of root) was detected in upper central incisors. Overall, both lateral and central maxillary incisors are the most susceptible to resorption, probably due to the shape of the root (bottle shaped or blunted) [4,24].

A study based on CBCT measurements [25] showed that 6.6% of patients had at least one tooth with extreme resorption (above 4 mm). The systematic review performed by Weltman [26] showed that severe orthodontically induced external root resorption appeared in only 1-5% of the teeth, which agrees with our findings (2.99%). Previous studies showed that prevalence of root resorption greater than 2 mm (stage III and IV) varied from 10% to 18% [4,27]. In another study, Levander and Malmgren [28] examined patients with oligodontia and found that only 5% of teeth were resorbed in 2 mm and more. The authors suggested that it might be caused by a high proportion of missing upper lateral incisors in the sample.

A study from Poland Kowalska et al. [29] measured the width-to-length ratio in incisor roots visible in panoramic view before and after orthodontic treatment. The authors evaluated upper and lower incisors, and they showed that only 10.83% of the examined teeth presented with signs of resorption. This low value could be caused by a reduction of orthodontic forces during the treatment in comparison to older techniques using light wires.

When gender is taken into account, there are many studies that showed no significant correlation of sex and the prevalence or amount of external resorption with orthodontic treatment [19,21,23,25,28,30-32], which is similar to our findings. However, in a study from 1975 Newman indicated that females are more susceptible to apical root loss than males [33]. According to some previous studies [22,27] patient’s age may be a factor influencing the prevalence and level of resorptive changes in maxillary anterior teeth, which is contrary to the results of Sameshima and Sinclair [31,34] who found that adults experienced more advanced resorption than children but only in the mandibular anterior teeth. The authors did not find correlation between age and the amount of apical root resorption in the maxillary anterior region. They also showed that the most affected teeth were lateral upper incisors and those with abnormal shape of the root. Additionally, they found that the Caucasian population is more prone to experience greater root resorption than Asian patients.

Panoramic radiographs can be used in diagnosing and detecting EARR, but further studies should be performed including 3D imaging (CBCT), which seems to be more accurate in the evaluation of small structures and details.

Conclusions

External apical root resorption due to orthodontic treatment is a common finding on panoramic radiographs. In our study, maxillary central incisors were the most frequently affected teeth, followed by lateral upper incisors and canines. The gender and age of the patients were not found to be significant factors increasing the risk of root resorption.

Conflict of interest

The authors report no conflict of interest.

References

1 

Patel S, Ford TP. Is the resorption external or internal? Dent Update 2007; 34: 218229218-220, 222, 224-226, 229.

2 

Ne RF, Witherspoon DE, Gutmann JL. Tooth resorption. Quintessence Int 1999; 30: 9-25.

3 

Fernandes M, de Ataide I, Wagle R. Tooth resorption part II–external resorption: Case series. J Conserv Dent 2013; 16: 180-185.

4 

Levander E, Malmgren O. Evaluation of the risk of root resorption during orthodontic treatment: a study of upper incisors. Eur J Orthod 1988; 10: 30-38.

5 

Vlaskalic V, Boyd RL, Baumrind S. Etiology and sequelae of root resorption. Semin Orthod 1998; 2: 124-131.

6 

Topkara A, Karaman AI, Kau ChH. Apical root resorption caused by orthodontic forces: a brief review and a long-term observation. Eur J Dent 2012; 6: 445-453.

7 

Maués CP, do Nascimento RR, Vilella Ode V: Severe root resorption resulting from orthodontic treatment: prevalence and risk factors. Dental Press J Orthod 2015; 20: 52-58.

8 

Remington DN, Joondeph DR, Artun J, et al. Long-term evaluation of root resorption occurring during orthodontic treatment. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1989; 96: 43-46.

9 

Saccomanno S, Passarelli PC, Oliva B, et al. Comparison between two radiological methods for assessment of tooth root resorption: an in vitro study. BioMed Res Int 2018; 2018: 5152172.

10 

Sameshima GT, Asgarifar KO. Assessment of root resorption and root shape: periapical vs panoramic films. Angle Orthod 2001; 71: 185-189.

11 

Rahmel S, Schulze RKW. Accuracy in detecting artificial root resorption in panoramic radiography versus tomosynthetic panoramic radio-graphs. J Endod 2019; 45: 634-639.

12 

Marinescu IR, Bănică AC, Mercuţ V, et al. Root resorption diagnostic: role of digital panoramic radiography. Curr Health Sci J 2019; 45: 156-166.

13 

Castro IO, Alencar AH, Valladares-Neto J, et al. Apical root resorption due to orthodontic treatment detected by cone beam computed tomography. Angle Orthod 2013; 83: 196-203.

14 

Friedland B. Clinical radiological issues in orthodontic practice. Semin Orthod 1998; 4: 64-78.

15 

Ahuja PD, Mhaske SP, Mishra G, et al. Assessment of root resorption and root shape by periapical and panoramic radiographs: a comparative study. J Contemp Dent Pract 2017; 18: 479-483.

16 

Yi J, Sun Y, Li Y, et al. Cone-beam computed tomography versus periapical radiograph for diagnosing external root resorption: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Angle Orthod 2017; 87: 328-337.

17 

Lima TF, Gamba TO, Zaia AA, et al. Evaluation of cone beam computed tomography and periapical radiography in the diagnosis of root resorption. Aus Dent J 2016; 61: 425-431.

18 

Janson GR, De Luca Canto G, Martins DR, et al. A radiographic comparison of apical root resorption after orthodontic treatment with 3 different fixed appliance techniques. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2000; 118: 262-273.

19 

Kennedy DB, Joondeph DR, Osterberg SK, et al. The effect of extraction and orthodontic treatment on dentoalveolar support. Am J Orthod 1983; 84: 183-190.

20 

Sharpe W, Reed B, Subtelny JD, et al. Orthodontic relapse, apical root resorption, and crestal alveolar bone levels. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1987; 91: 252-258.

21 

Nanekrungsan K, Patanaporn V, Janhom A, et al. External apical root resorption in maxillary incisors in orthodontic patients: associated factors and radiographic evaluation. Imaging Sci Dent 2012; 42: 147-154.

22 

Jiang RP, McDonald JP, Fu MK. Root resorption before and after orthodontic treatment: a clinical study of contributory factors. Eur J Orthod 2010; 32: 693-697.

23 

Elhaddaoui R, Benyahia H, Azeroual MF, et al. Resorption of maxil-lary incisors after orthodontic treatment--clinical study of risk factors. Int Orthod 2016; 14: 48-64.

24 

Mirabella AD, Artun J. Risk factors for apical root resorption of maxillary anterior teeth in adult orthodontic patients. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1995; 108: 48-55.

25 

Lund H, Gröndahl K, Hansen K, et al. Apical root resorption during orthodontic treatment. A prospective study using cone beam CT. Angle Orthod 2012; 82: 480-487.

26 

Weltman B, Vig KW, Fields HW, et al. Root resorption associated with orthodontic tooth movement: a systematic review. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2010; 137: 462-476.

27 

Linge BO, Linge L. Apical root resorption in upper anterior teeth. Eur J Orthod 1983; 5: 173-183.

28 

Levander E, Malmgren O, Stenback K. Apical root resorption during orthodontic treatment of patients with multiple aplasia: a study of maxillary incisors. Eur J Orthod 1998; 20: 427-434.

29 

Kowalska E, Klimek L, Śmiech-Słomkowska G. Resorpcje korzeni po leczeniu ortodontycznym; stosunek szerokości do długości zęba. Forum Ortodontyczne–Orthodontic Forum 2011; 7: 185-191.

30 

Phillips JR. Apical root resorption under orthodontic therapy. Angle Orthod 1955; 25: 1-22.

31 

Sameshima GT, Sinclair PM. Predicting and preventing root resorption: Part I. Diagnostic factors. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2001; 119: 505-510.

32 

Castro IO, Alencar AH, Valladares-Neto J, et al. Apical root resorption due to orthodontic treatment detected by cone beam computed tomography. Angle Orthod 2013; 83: 196-203.

33 

Newman WG. Possible etiologic factors in external root resorption. Am J Orthod 1975; 67: 522-539.

34 

Sameshima GT, Sinclair PM. Predicting and preventing root resorption: Part II. Treatment factors. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2001; 119: 511-515.

Copyright: © Polish Medical Society of Radiology This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0). License allowing third parties to download articles and share them with others as long as they credit the authors and the publisher, but without permission to change them in any way or use them commercially.
 
Quick links
© 2022 Termedia Sp. z o.o. All rights reserved.
Developed by Bentus.