CASE REPORT Identical unerupted maxillary incisors in monozygotic twins Hasan Babacan, a Fırat € Ozt € urk, b and Hidayet Burak Polat c Sivas, Malatya, and Kayseri, Turkey Mesiodens is the most common type of supernumerary tooth found in the premaxilla. It might be discov- ered by the orthodontist by chance on a radiograph or as the cause of an unerupted maxillary central incisor. The genetic transmission of supernumerary and impacted teeth is poorly understood. The occur- rence of identical unerupted maxillary central incisors and mesiodentes in monozygotic twins suggests that genetic factors might influence the etiology of this problem. In this case report, we discuss the treat- ment of unerupted maxillary permanent incisors caused by mesiodentes in monozygotic twins. (Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2010;138:498-509) D elayed of eruption of a permanent maxillary incisor (due to a supernumerary tooth) is a problem encountered occasionally by an orthodontist. These supernumerary teeth, located in the premaxillary region, are known as mesiodentes. The prevalence of mesiodentes has been estimated at 0.15% to1.9% in the population. 1,2 Although there is no significant sex distribution in deciduous supernumerary teeth, 3 males are affected about twice as frequently as females in the permanent dentition. 1-4 Mesiodentes have been reported to cause delay or failure of eruption of the permanent incisors in 28% to 52% of reported cases. 5,6 Brodie 7 first reported delayed eruption of central incisors in 1936 using radiographic records of a 10- year-old boy with a mesiodens. He noted mesiodentes in 3 other members of his family. Since then, several pa- tients with a mesiodens have been reported, and various theories such as hyperactivity of the dental lamina, 2 a phylogenetic relic of extinct ancestors who had 3 cen- tral incisors, 8 and a dichotomy of tooth buds, one of which is the mesiodens, 1 have been proposed as the eti- ology of mesiodentes. Although genetic origin is thought to contribute to the development of a mesiodens, the familial pattern of occurrence and mesiodens in twins strongly supports genetics. Autosomal dominant inheritance with incomplete penetration has been the proposed genetic theory. 1,6 Many twins have bilateral occurrence, and unilateral mesiodentes can be mirror images. 9 The aim of this re- port was to illustrate the orthodontic treatment of unilat- eral mesiodens in monozygotic twins with identical malocclusions. DIAGNOSIS AND ETIOLOGY The patients, AY and UY, are monozygotic twin brothers. They were referred to our clinic when they were 10.5 years old for orthodontic treatment of im- pacted maxillary left central incisors. Their medical his- tories showed no systemic diseases, and the dental histories showed no facial trauma or other developmen- tal anomalies. Each had a balanced facial profile (Fig 1). Clinical analysis showed that both children were in the mixed dentition, and their left central incisors were miss- ing. Space loss and midline shift of the right central in- cisor had occurred, and the left lateral incisors had drifted mesially in both children (Figs 2 and 3). Radiographic examinations showed that a mesiodens was preventing the eruption of the maxillary left central incisor in both twins (Fig 4). Maxillary anterior occlu- sal and periapical radiographs showed that the mesio- dentes were palatal to the impacted central incisors (Figs 5 and 6). Cephalometric analyses showed a Class I skeletal relationship, with a normal growth pattern (Fig 7, Table). They had similar clinical, radiographic, and cephalometric characteristics with a similar clinical appearance, so their treatment objectives and alterna- tives were the same, as was the treatment progress. TREATMENT OBJECTIVES Based on diagnostic records, the treatment objec- tives were to (1) remove the mesiodens before surgical a Associate professor, Department of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Cum- huriyet University, Sivas, Turkey. b Asistant professor, Department of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Inonu University, Malatya, Turkey. c Private practice, Kayseri, Turkey. The authors report no commercial, proprietary, or financial interest in the products or companies described in this article. Reprint requests to: Hasan Babacan, Cumhuriyet U ¨ niversitesi Dis x Hekimlig ˘i Fak€ ultesi, Ortodonti AD. 58140 Sivas, T€ urkiye; e-mail, babacanhasan@ yahoo.com. Submitted, July 2008; revised and accepted, August 2008. 0889-5406/$36.00 Copyright Ó 2010 by the American Association of Orthodontists. doi:10.1016/j.ajodo.2008.08.043 498
12
Embed
Identical unerupted maxillary incisors in monozygotic twins · ances placed on the maxillary permanent teeth and deciduous molars. After the maxillary teeth were leveled,the boys
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Hasan Babacan,a Fırat €Ozt€urk,b and Hidayet Burak Polatc
Sivas, Malatya, and Kayseri, Turkey
Mesiodens is the most common type of supernumerary tooth found in the premaxilla. It might be discov-ered by the orthodontist by chance on a radiograph or as the cause of an unerupted maxillary centralincisor. The genetic transmission of supernumerary and impacted teeth is poorly understood. The occur-rence of identical unerupted maxillary central incisors and mesiodentes in monozygotic twins suggeststhat genetic factors might influence the etiology of this problem. In this case report, we discuss the treat-ment of unerupted maxillary permanent incisors caused by mesiodentes in monozygotic twins. (Am JOrthod Dentofacial Orthop 2010;138:498-509)
Delayed of eruption of a permanent maxillaryincisor (due to a supernumerary tooth) is aproblem encountered occasionally by an
orthodontist. These supernumerary teeth, located inthe premaxillary region, are known as mesiodentes.The prevalence of mesiodentes has been estimated at0.15% to1.9% in the population.1,2 Although there isno significant sex distribution in deciduoussupernumerary teeth,3 males are affected about twiceas frequently as females in the permanent dentition.1-4
Mesiodentes have been reported to cause delay orfailure of eruption of the permanent incisors in 28% to52% of reported cases.5,6
Brodie7 first reported delayed eruption of centralincisors in 1936 using radiographic records of a 10-year-old boy with a mesiodens. He noted mesiodentesin 3 other members of his family. Since then, several pa-tients with a mesiodens have been reported, and varioustheories such as hyperactivity of the dental lamina,2
a phylogenetic relic of extinct ancestors who had 3 cen-tral incisors,8 and a dichotomy of tooth buds, one ofwhich is the mesiodens,1 have been proposed as the eti-ology of mesiodentes. Although genetic origin isthought to contribute to the development of a mesiodens,the familial pattern of occurrence and mesiodens intwins strongly supports genetics. Autosomal dominant
aAssociate professor, Department of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Cum-
huriyet University, Sivas, Turkey.bAsistant professor, Department of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Inonu
Submitted, July 2008; revised and accepted, August 2008.
0889-5406/$36.00
Copyright � 2010 by the American Association of Orthodontists.
doi:10.1016/j.ajodo.2008.08.043
498
inheritance with incomplete penetration has been theproposed genetic theory.1,6
Many twins have bilateral occurrence, and unilateralmesiodentes can be mirror images.9 The aim of this re-port was to illustrate the orthodontic treatment of unilat-eral mesiodens in monozygotic twins with identicalmalocclusions.
DIAGNOSIS AND ETIOLOGY
The patients, AY and UY, are monozygotic twinbrothers. They were referred to our clinic when theywere 10.5 years old for orthodontic treatment of im-pacted maxillary left central incisors. Their medical his-tories showed no systemic diseases, and the dentalhistories showed no facial trauma or other developmen-tal anomalies. Each had a balanced facial profile (Fig 1).Clinical analysis showed that both children were in themixed dentition, and their left central incisors were miss-ing. Space loss and midline shift of the right central in-cisor had occurred, and the left lateral incisors haddrifted mesially in both children (Figs 2 and 3).
Radiographic examinations showed that a mesiodenswas preventing the eruption of the maxillary left centralincisor in both twins (Fig 4). Maxillary anterior occlu-sal and periapical radiographs showed that the mesio-dentes were palatal to the impacted central incisors(Figs 5 and 6). Cephalometric analyses showed a ClassI skeletal relationship, with a normal growth pattern(Fig 7, Table). They had similar clinical, radiographic,and cephalometric characteristics with a similar clinicalappearance, so their treatment objectives and alterna-tives were the same, as was the treatment progress.
TREATMENT OBJECTIVES
Based on diagnostic records, the treatment objec-tives were to (1) remove the mesiodens before surgical
Fig 1. Pretreatment facial photographs of AY and UY.
American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics Babacan, €Ozt€urk, and Polat 499Volume 138, Number 4
exposure of impacted central incisors, (2) erupt the im-pacted central incisors orthodontically, (3) develop idealoverjet and overbite, and (4) correct the midlines androot angulations.
TREATMENT ALTERNATIVES
Treatment options included (1) wait for spontaneouseruption of the impacted central incisor after surgicalextraction of the mesiodens, (2) remove the mesiodens
Fig 2. Pretreatment intraoral photographs of AY and UY.
500 Babacan, €Ozt€urk, and Polat American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics
October 2010
with surgical exposure of the unerupted tooth, and (3)remove the mesiodens with orthodontic traction of theunerupted tooth.
After careful consideration of all parameters, re-moval of the mesiodens with orthodontic treatmentwas the chosen plan.
TREATMENT PROGRESS
The twins were treated in a relatively analogousfashion, with 0.018 3 0.022-in Roth system fixed appli-ances placed on the maxillary permanent teeth anddeciduous molars. After the maxillary teeth were
leveled, the boys were admitted to the oral and maxillo-facial surgery department for their surgeries. Thelabially impacted maxillary central incisors weresurgically exposed with an envelope flap. Under localanesthesia, the supernumerary teeth were removedwith an elevator after bone removal (Fig 8). A buttonwith a gold chain was bonded to the impacted central in-cisors. The surgical flap and closure were carefully per-formed to prevent poor periodontal complications. Afterthe tissues had healed, 0.014-in superelastic nickel-titanium wires were placed, and space was created forthe impacted central incisors with an open-coil spring.
Fig 3. Pretreatment dental casts of AY and UY.
American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics Babacan, €Ozt€urk, and Polat 501Volume 138, Number 4
Elastic thread was placed through the link of the goldchain and tied with tension to the coil, thereby applyingtraction to the impacted incisor. Once the impactedtooth became visible, an orthodontic bracket was placedideally. The impacted central incisors were moved intotheir proper positions in 9 months (Fig 9). Afterthe maxillary arches were leveled and aligned, the
mandibular arch was bonded. Treatment was finishedafter the eruption of all permanent teeth. Bilateral ClassI occlusions with ideal overjet and overbite wereachieved. Essix retainers (Dentsply, York, Pa) wereplaced in both dental arches to maintain the orthodonticcorrections. The total active treatment time was 29months.
Fig 4. Pretreatment panoramic radiographs of AY and UY.
Fig 5. Pretreatment occlusal radiographs of AY and UY.
Fig 6. Pretreatment periapical radiographs of AY and UY.
502 Babacan, €Ozt€urk, and Polat American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics
October 2010
TREATMENT RESULTS
The impacted maxillary left central incisors weresuccessfully aligned in their proper positions, andboth boys finished treatment with pleasant smiles(Fig 10). Class I molar and canine relationships, andideal overjet and overbite were achieved. In both pa-tients, the repositioned incisors had acceptable
gingival contour and width of the attached gingiva(Figs 11 and 12). The posttreatment panoramicradiographs show no root resorption or periodontalbone loss (Fig 13). Cephalometric measurementsshow that Class I skeletal relationships and normalgrowth patterns were maintained after treatment(Figs 14 and 15).
Fig 7. Pretreatment cephalometric radiographs and tracings of AY and UY.
Fig 8. The extracted mesiodentes of AY and UY.
American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics Babacan, €Ozt€urk, and Polat 503Volume 138, Number 4
DISCUSSION
The etiology of a mesiodens is not understood. Sev-eral theories, such as hyperactivity of the dental lam-ina,2 a phylogenetic relic of extinct ancestors,8 anda dichotomy of tooth buds,1 have been proposed to ex-plain the phenomenon. Many authors have focused onthe genetic influence, such as Brook,10 who reportedmuch higher frequencies of supernumerary teeth amongfirst-degree relatives than in the general population, sug-gesting a significant genetic component in the etiology.Similarly, Hattab et al5 suggested that supernumeraryteeth have a strong hereditary component but donot conform with a simple Mendelian pattern.
Fig 9. Orthodontic traction of impacted central incisors. Progress photos of AY and UY: A, beginning oftreatment; B, after 6 months of treatment; C, After 7 months of treatment; D, after 9 months of treatment.
504 Babacan, €Ozt€urk, and Polat American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics
October 2010
Langowska-Adamsczyk and Karmanska11 reportedsimilarly positioned supernumerary and impacted teethin monozygotic twins, and they concluded that there isa genetic influence in the etiology. Nevertheless, theysuspected environmental factors for the differences ob-served in the twins’ dentitions. Kabban et al12 investi-gated 34 pairs of twins and found a remarkablesimilarity in tooth sizes and morphologies of monozy-gotic twins, suggesting a strong inheritability factor intooth size and shape. The twins presented heredisplayed identical appearances on all radiographic,cephalometric, and intraoral images. This identical re-semblance strongly indicates a genetic origin as themain etiologic factor.
There were 3 treatment choices for these twins: re-moval of the mesiodens, removal of the mesiodens withsurgical exposure of the unerupted tooth, and removalof the supernumerary tooth with orthodontic traction ofthe unerupted tooth. Studies have shown that the delayedtooth might erupt naturally after the supernumerary is re-moved; however, eruption occurs when the arch length issufficient and root formation of the unerupted tooth hasbeen completed.13-15 These twins had inadequate spacefor the unerupted central incisor because of migration ofadjacent teeth into the space. Different treatmentmodalities might have been applied to each twin todetermine the best treatment alternative for similarpatients; however, this would have been unethical.
Fig 10. Posttreatment facial photographs of AY and UY.
American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics Babacan, €Ozt€urk, and Polat 505Volume 138, Number 4
Removal of the mesiodens with orthodontic traction of theunerupted central incisor seemed to be the best treatmentapproach. Patient cooperation, length of treatment,potential risk of migration of adjacent teeth into theempty space, and patient age must be considered intreatment of a mesiodens.
Some previous reports stated that spontaneouseruption occurs 18 to 24 months after removal of a mesio-dens.16,17 These twins’ impacted central incisors were
fully erupted with orthodontic traction in 9 months, andthe total treatment time was 29 months. Eruption andleveling of the permanent teeth were controlled in thenext 20 months. The eruption of the second permanentmolars was controlled at the followup appointments.
CONCLUSIONS
Monozygotic twins with identical malocclusionswere treated in the same manner. It is known that the
Fig 11. Posttreatment intraoral photographs of AY and UY.
506 Babacan, €Ozt€urk, and Polat American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics
October 2010
genotype of the monozygotic twins is the same; in thisreport, the phenotype was the same also. Environmentalfactors might affect the formation of the phenotype;
however, the identical appearance of these twin brothersstrongly suggests that the role of genetic influence on theetiology of malocclusions could be stronger than known.
Fig 12. Posttreatment dental casts of AY and UY.
American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics Babacan, €Ozt€urk, and Polat 507Volume 138, Number 4
Fig 13. Posttreatment panoramic radiographs of AY and UY.
Fig 14. Posttreatment cephalometric radiographs and tracings of AY and UY.
508 Babacan, €Ozt€urk, and Polat American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics
October 2010
Fig 15. Initial and final cephalometric tracings of AY and UY, superimposed on S-N at sella.
Table. Cephalometric summary
AY UY
Measurements Initial Final Initial Final
SNA (�) 78 78 78 79
SNB (�) 74 75 75 77
ANB (�) 4 3 3 2
GoGN-SN (�) 41 42 42 43
U1-SN (�) 98 104 102 104
IMPA (�) 86 89 85 84
U1-L1 (�) 135 126 129 129
U1-NA (�) 20 19 24 25
U1-NA (mm) 3 5 4,5 4
L1-NB (�) 22 25 24 23
L1-NB (mm) 3.5 4 4.5 4
American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics Babacan, €Ozt€urk, and Polat 509Volume 138, Number 4
REFERENCES
1. Sedano HO, Gorlin RJ. Familial occurrence of mesiodens. Oral
Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1969;27:360-1.
2. Primosch RE. Anterior supernumerary teeth—assessment and
surgical intervention in children. Pediatr Dent 1981;3:204-15.
3. Kinirons MJ. Unerupted premaxillary supernumerary teeth. A study
of their occurrence in males and females. Br Dent J 1982;153:110.
4. Mason C, Azam N, Holt RD, Rule DC. A retrospective study of
unerupted maxillary incisors associated with supernumerary
teeth. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2000;38:62-5.
5. Hattab FN, Yassin OM, Rawashdeh MA. Supernumerary teeth:
report of three cases and review of the literature. ASDC J Dent
Child 1994;61:382-93.
6. Nik-Hussein NN. Supernumerary teeth in the premaxillary
region: its effects on the eruption and occlusion of the permanent
incisors. Aust Orthod J 1990;11:247-50.
7. Brodie AG. Two unusual cases of supernumerary teeth. Angle
Orthod 1936;6:209-11.
8. Marya CM, Kumar BR. Familial occurrence of mesiodentes
with unusual findings: case reports. Quintessence Int 1998;
29:49-51.
9. Seddon RP, Johnstone SC, Smith PB. Mesiodentes in twins: a case
report and a review of the literature. Int J Paediatr Dent 1997;7:
177-84.
10. Brook AH. A unifying aetiological explanation for anomalies
of human tooth number and size. Arch Oral Biol 1984;29:
373-8.
11. Langowska-Adamsczyk H, Karmanska B. Similar locations of
impacted and supernumerary teeth in monozygotic twins: a re-
port of 2 cases. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2001;119:
67-70.
12. Kabban M, Fearne J, Jovanovski V, Zou L. Tooth size and mor-
phology in twins. Int J Paediatr Dent 2001;11:333-9.
13. Witsenberg B, Boering G. Eruption of impacted permanent incisors
after removal of supernumerary teeth. Int J Oral Surg 1981;10:423-31.