Basit öğe kaydını göster

dc.contributor.authorCoskun, Ipek
dc.contributor.authorKaya, Burcak
dc.date.accessioned2020-12-26T08:35:37Z
dc.date.available2020-12-26T08:35:37Z
dc.date.issued2019
dc.identifier.issn0003-3219en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://watermark.silverchair.com/050818-344_1.pdf?token=AQECAHi208BE49Ooan9kkhW_Ercy7Dm3ZL_9Cf3qfKAc485ysgAAAqIwggKeBgkqhkiG9w0BBwagggKPMIICiwIBADCCAoQGCSqGSIb3DQEHATAeBglghkgBZQMEAS4wEQQMAeYtGEmkDmAlEIcdAgEQgIICVYKqg5s7wN-r2wyEuyu9ZkXrG6N0MGNC4NdQ4hRclKI6w8AwX-68JasAgAg9etIPSA3qykPdvuvw5CKfYk9V_DnYaVvDy7POaHhfHSCD24laaq9K94r5Mes3vpE_H-Qc0NzCFQ-xBgQ83fZBmGLW6VN5Va6VyYpiG7gZsiRGJFT8tApkjDpQ_TyrJ6g_oHiEUXU_ZY2egjYP8FWdrqM9rSRt6R4A8WttyOODQbig3EWBUjFwAv4J4aACvVM9ZE2UWZny6s9DYYsMxZZ0vHw_GrtMeVKGw6ukgtqF6HcCMKshPHQFjmR-y5fkGOjaoItXkTDltBAOlWYgDGAAlpN3TBhpmQf4bQUPwyNwOILwdWxwkFFKzAD-3ytYmwd1qcoWuDXObUBOtJ6lkirzElJR2MZFgj94xsTxjgb49KapvxAFEQS9duynDYYhGCXpMqVZxrFDtcAqaUvEKyl_sxpQ1opp98SygSS8MUWhe7cMAgGid0MrtLEjfmTw_noyCjyAevjZGXqGSAvACytgYpscCRLZEfvV0Xr4aEUiUm4nBh5G8HFU3K_uFTr63d-WWQ4bbV6f0NQ7giNRBczljASBbzT8HgABy01eaCJDhWO0A6fglhITzEpUZ1jYEIlRaih31DILWZzsmNDU4KAaZikyJ479u04cMrYP7wAaN4ScMOYVSaDd2kP3vt-LA9jUFZJVKHNBj3gxsTiQXv8uNVH-SlJEFhZRupuO7zHt4xEzXuki-b5oYfuFTBeu8IVK-fw8l7wNqJ5ZFSkI1IxyIsugF_xeMvKx4Q
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11727/5207
dc.description.abstractObjectives: To examine the relationship between sagittal facial pattern and dehiscence/fenestration presence in conjunction with buccolingual tooth inclination by using cone beam computed tomography. Materials and Methods: The study was carried out on the cone beam computed tomography scans of the following three groups of patients (n = 20 in each group): Class I, Class II, Class III. Buccolingual tooth inclination, buccal dehiscence/fenestration presence, and lingual dehiscence/fenestration presence were evaluated on each tooth. Analysis of variance, Kruskall-Wallis H, Scheffe, and chi-square tests were used for statistical comparisons. Results: Differences (P<.05) were observed between the groups for inclination of upper incisors and all lower teeth except for second molars. Dehiscence prevalence in the upper buccal and posterior buccal regions was higher (P<.05) in the Class I group when compared with the other groups. Lower buccal and anterior buccal regions showed higher (P=.0001) dehiscence prevalence in all groups. No difference was observed in fenestration prevalence between the groups. The upper buccal and anterior buccal regions showed higher (P=.0001) fenestration prevalence in all groups. Conclusions: Orthodontists must consider concealed alveolar defects in treatment planning to avoid gingival recession or tooth mobility.en_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.relation.isversionof10.2319/050818-344.1en_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessen_US
dc.subjectInclinationen_US
dc.subjectDehiscenceen_US
dc.subjectFenestrationen_US
dc.subjectSagittal patternen_US
dc.subjectCBCTen_US
dc.titleAppraisal of the relationship between tooth inclination, dehiscence, fenestration, and sagittal skeletal pattern with cone beam computed tomographyen_US
dc.typearticleen_US
dc.relation.journalANGLE ORTHODONTISTen_US
dc.identifier.volume89en_US
dc.identifier.issue4en_US
dc.identifier.startpage544en_US
dc.identifier.endpage551en_US
dc.identifier.wos000472147100003en_US
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-85068491330en_US
dc.contributor.pubmedID30741575en_US
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergien_US


Bu öğenin dosyaları:

Thumbnail

Bu öğe aşağıdaki koleksiyon(lar)da görünmektedir.

Basit öğe kaydını göster