Microsoft Word - 254 2022.docx Associa'on of sella turcica bridging and morphologic characteris'cs with palatally impacted canine in lateral cephalograms. Vol 10 No 1 (2022) DOI 10.5195/d3000.2022.254 h#p://den*stry3000.pi#.edu Association of sella turcica bridging and morphologic characteristics with palatally impacted canine in lateral cephalograms. Nikoo Ghasemi1, Soraya Akhoondi2, Zohre Reyhani3, Nima Motamed4, Azin Nourian5 1Dental Student, School of Dentistry, Zanjan University of Medical Sciences, Zanjan, Iran 2Dentist, private practice, Zanjan, Iran 3Assistant Professor, Department of Dental Radiology, School of Dentistry, Zanjan University of Medical Sciences, Zanjan, Iran 4Associate Professor, Department of Social Medicine, Zanjan University of Medical Sciences, Zanjan, Iran 5Assistant Professor, Orthodontic Department, Zanjan University of Medical Sciences, Zanjan, Iran Abstract INTRODUCTION: Researchers have been interested in the rela'onship between sella turcica bridging and various dental anomalies. This study inves'gates the associa'on of sella turcica bridging and morphologic characteris'cs with the palatally impacted canine tooth. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Orthodon'c records with high-quality lateral cephalometric and panoramic images were chosen. The study comprised 30 pa'ents with palatally impacted canines (17 females and 13 males) and 30 controls with erupted canines (15 males and 15 females). The measurements were performed using the SCANORA 5.2.6 soKware. Further, the relevant data was collected and analyzed using SPSS soKware version 22. Descrip've sta's'cal analysis was used to inves'gate data aKer their valida'on, with t- tests and chi-square tests to compare the two groups. The regression test was used to lessen the effects of confounding variables. RESULTS: In the study group, 5 pa'ents had type III sella turcica bridging, whereas 2 pa'ents in the control group had type III sella turcica bridging. Results showed a sta's'cally significant difference between the two groups (P-value=0.017). In the study group, the interclinoid distance and canine tooth angle were significantly lower than the control group (P-value=0.001, P-value=0.001). However, there were no significant differences in the depth and anterior-posterior diameter of sella turcica between the two groups (P-value=0.543, P- value=0.766). In terms of age (P-value = 0.400) and gender (P-value = 0.605), there was no significant difference between the two groups. CONCLUSION: The palatally canine impac'on may be associated with the bridging of the sella turcica. Therefore, sella turcica bridging can be used as a diagnos'c parameter for palatally canine impac'on. KEYWORDS: Tooth abnormali'es; Orthodon'cs; Sella turcica Cita9on: Ghasemi, N et al. (2022) Associa9on of sella turcica bridging and morphologic characteris9cs with palatally impacted canine in lateral cephalograms. Den9stry 3000. 1:a001 doi:10.5195/d3000.2022.254 Received: October 16, 2021 Accepted: April 23, 2022 Published: June 23, 2022 Copyright: ©2022 Ghasemi, N et al. This is an open access ar9cle licensed under a Crea9ve Commons ASribu9on Work 4.0 United States License. Email: azin.nourian@gmail.com Introduction Sella turcica, an important anatomical landmark in lateral cephalometric imaging, is an area in the form of a saddle that is based in the middle part of the cranial fossa[1]. It is also an important finding for orthodontists since many pathological processes are shown by Associa'on of sella turcica bridging and morphologic characteris'cs with palatally impacted canine in lateral cephalograms. Vol 10 No 1 (2022) DOI 10.5195/d3000.2022.254 h#p://den*stry3000.pi#.edu changes in the form and dimensions of the sella turcica. sella turcica is classified into three groups: circular, oval and flat shapes. The most common among them is the circular, followed by oval and flat respectively. [2]. Sella turcica bridging could be a common variation of sella turcica, possibly related to numerous systemic developmental syndromes[3]. According to the theories expressing that mutations of the HOX hedgehog gene negatively affect the midface, teeth and part of the sella turcica development, any modifications in the developmental level could result in sella turcica bridging that might further cause dental anomalies[4]. Dental anomalies can be caused by various factors, including genetic, epigenetic, and environmental influences[5]. Although many studies have been conducted on the common occurrence of various dental irregularities, few have looked into the connection between bridging of the sella turcica and dental anomalies[6]. Canine impaction is one of the types of dental anomalies. For many years, orthodontists have struggled with canine impaction. Examinations can be an effective way to reduce the cost and treatment time of the patients[7]. Excluding the third molars, the maxillary canine is the most commonly impacted[8]. Furthermore, impaction is more common in women[9]. Canine impaction in about 15% of cases is located buccally while in about 85% it is located palatally[10]. Buccal canine impaction is originally caused by dental crowding[11]. While palatally canine impactions frequently, but not always, are found in dentitions with various anomalies[12]. Some studies claim that sella turcica bridging is more common in patients with impacted canines[7, 13], while others claim there is no significant link between impacted canines and sella turcica bridging[14, 15]. As there are few studies about the association of sella turcica bridging and morphologic characteristics with canine impaction as well as contradictory comments. further studies are needed [16]. Therefore, this study aims to determine sella turcica morphologic characteristics and the possible relationship between the sella turcica bridging and the palatally canine impaction in lateral cephalometric radiographs. Material and Methods This retrospective case-control study with convenience sampling evaluated 30 patients (17 females and 13 males) with at least one palatally impacted maxillary canine compared with 30 patients (15 females and 15 males) with normally erupted canines matched in terms of age and gender. This study was conducted to determine the association between palatally canine impaction and sella turcica bridging using orthodontic patients' pretreatment radiographic records referred to private oral and maxillofacial radiology centers in Zanjan city (Iran), from 2017 to 2020, with an equal racial background as Iranian root. Approval from the Ethics Committee of Zanjan Dental school was obtained (number IR.ZUMS.REC.1398.417). All the patients who participated in the study signed written informed consent. The inclusion criteria were 13-30 years old orthodontic patients with good quality standardized panoramic and lateral cephalograms were included in the study. Patients who had dental malformations and syndromes, significant illnesses or medical conditions as well as cases with blurred radiographic appearance and a history of orthognathic surgery, orthodontic treatment, cleft lip and palate, maxillofacial pathology, trauma were excluded from this study. The study group consisted of 30 patients (17 females and 13 males) with at least one palatally impacted maxillary canine and the control group of 30 patients (15 females and 15 males) with normally erupted canines no dental abnormalities. The two groups were matched in terms of age and sex. (Table 1) The pretreatment orthodontic panoramic and lateral cephalometric radiographs were used to diagnose tooth impaction or eruption[18]. To determine the palatally impaction of canine teeth, panoramic and lateral cephalometry radiographs and all other sources of information available, such as cone beam Associa'on of sella turcica bridging and morphologic characteris'cs with palatally impacted canine in lateral cephalograms. Vol 10 No 1 (2022) DOI 10.5195/d3000.2022.254 h#p://den*stry3000.pi#.edu computed tomography, occlusal view radiographs were used, in some cases referring to orthodontic diagnostic records. The radiographic parameters studied were the interclinoid distance (the distance between the tip of the tuberculum sellae and the dorsume sellae), sella turcica depth (the length of a line dropped perpendicularly from the line above to the deepest point on the sella floor), anteroposterior diameter of the sella turcica (the longest distance between the tip of the tuberculum sellae and the posterior contour of the sella), sella turcica bridging and canine angle. The SCANORA 5.2.6 software was used to conduct measurements. The line drawn from the highest point of the condyles was used to compute the canine angle. (Figure 1) A standard scoring scale devised by Leonardi et al was used to assess the degree of sella turcica bridging[19]. Type I: normal sella turcica, interclinoid distance equal to or greater than three-quarters of the largest anteroposterior diameter. Type II: incomplete calcification, interclinoid distance equal to or lower than three-quarters of the largest anteroposterior diameter. Type III: complete calcification, only the sella turcica diaphragm is visible on radiography. (Figure 2) Lateral cephalometric radiographs were used to assess the sella turcica, performed by an expert oral and maxillofacial radiologist. To confirm the accuracy of the measures, 10 samples were re-examined at two- week intervals to ensure the reliability and reproducibility of the assessments. No significant difference was found (P-value>0.05). The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) is presented in the table 2. SPSS software version 22 was used to analyze data. Descriptive statistical analysis was utilized and to compare the two groups, t-test and chi-square tests were performed. Results A total of 60 radiographic records of patients were investigated. To assess data distribution, Kolmogorov- Smirnov test was employed. The results of the normality test showed normal distribution (P-value>0.05). We used t-test, two groups proportion and chi-square test to compare the data between two groups. The Mean±SD of the age of control group and study group was 17.87±3.04 and 18.57±3.35, respectively. The study group consisted of 30 patients (17 females and 13 males) and the control group of 30 patients (15 females and 15 males). In terms of age (P value = 0.400) and gender (P value = 0.605), there was no significant difference between the Variables Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) Interclinoid distance 0.966 Sella turcica depth 0.921 Ant-Post diameter of sella turcica 0.947 Canine angle 0.928 Figure 1. Two views of SCANORA version 5.2.6 software showing how to measure variables of Interclinoid distance, sella turcica depth, anteroposterior diameter of sella turcica bridging and canine angle Figure 2. Examples of different types of Sella turcica bridging, A: Type I, B: Type II, C: Type III Table 2: Method Error According to Intraclass correlation coefficient Associa'on of sella turcica bridging and morphologic characteris'cs with palatally impacted canine in lateral cephalograms. Vol 10 No 1 (2022) DOI 10.5195/d3000.2022.254 h#p://den*stry3000.pi#.edu two groups of patients. In the study group 33.3%(n=10), 50%(n=15) and 16.7%(n=5) of patients had type I, type II and type III of sella turcica bridging, respectively whereas in the control group, 70%(n=21), 23.3%(n=7), 6.7%(n=2) of patients had type I, type II and type III of sella turcica bridging, respectively. This resulted in a statistically significant difference(P-value=0.017). (Table 1) In the study group 20 patients had unilateral and 10 patients had bilateral canine impaction. While the total occurrence of canine impaction in maxillary left and right side was 54.5% (n=12) and 45.5% (n=10) in female respectively, this was 55.6% (n=10) and 44.4% (n=8) in male (Z=0.06, P-value=0.949). The measures of study group's interclinoid distance was significantly shorter than the control group (P- value = 0.001) as well as the canine angle which was significantly lower in the study group. (P- value = 0.001). However, the depth of the sella turcica and anteroposterior diameter of sella was not significantly different between the two groups with P-value 0.543 and 0.766, respectively. (Table 3) Discussion The sella turcica is a structure that may be easily traced in cephalometric analysis and may be seen clearly on lateral cephalometric radiographs. The shape of the sella turcica is very important in orthodontics because it serves as a reference point in orthodontic analysis[20]. We opted to investigate the association between sella turcica bridging and canine impaction and compare it to normal canine eruption due to the importance of its characteristics, such as morphology and size, as factors that can alter the pituitary gland’s pathologic status. The results of this study revealed that patients with canine impaction had considerably higher sella turcica bridging. Furthermore, the interclinoidal distance and canine angle of the study group were significantly lower than those of the control group. The depth of the sella turcica and the anteroposterior width of the sella turcica did not differ significantly. The findings of this investigation were in line with the majority of previous studies[7, 13, 19]. In line with the present study, Dadgar et al.(2020) conducted a study in 46 patients with canine impaction and 46 patients with normal canine eruption. The results showed that palatal canine impaction is positively associated with both atlas arcuate foramen and sella turcica bridging. However, the arcuate foramen was not investigated, but morphological characteristics of sella turcica were defined in the present study[13]. In the Baidas et al.(2018) study there was no difference in the morphology of the sella turcica between patients with and without canine impaction. The incidence of sella turcica bridging was observed to be considerably greater in patients with canine impaction (P-value 0.0001)[19]. The Variables Study group Control group P-value Age 18.57±3.35 17.87±3.04 0.400 Male/female 13/17 15/15 0.605 Sella turcica bridging Type I 10(33.3%) 21(70%) 0.017 Type II 15(50%) 7(23.3%) Type III 5(16.7%) 2(6.7%) Variables Mean±SD P-Value Study group Control group Interclinoid distance 4.86±0.47 5.96±1.20 0.001 Sella turcica depth 7.30±1.57 6.89±0.94 0.543 Ant-Post diameter of sella turcica 9.04±1.98 8.77±1.67 0.766 Canine angle 57.40±12.6 3 89.66±5.28 0.001 Table 1: Demographic and types of sella turcica bridging in the two groups Table 3: Measures of Sella turcica morphologic characteristics in two groups Associa'on of sella turcica bridging and morphologic characteris'cs with palatally impacted canine in lateral cephalograms. Vol 10 No 1 (2022) DOI 10.5195/d3000.2022.254 h#p://den*stry3000.pi#.edu results are consistent with the present study. Haji ghadimi et al. (2017) concluded that the impacted canine is related to the sella turcica bridging occurrence and severity in a case control study on lateral cephalometric records of 35 patients with canine impaction and 75 patients with normal canine eruption. The results are similar to the present study, although in the present study, morphological characteristics of sella turcica were also investigated [3]. In a study, Batool ali et al. (2014) compared 31 patients with canine impaction to 70 patients with normal canine eruption. The study's findings were consistent with the current study, revealing that the incidence of sella turcica bridging was considerably higher in the study group than in the control group (P value = 0.001). In addition, the sagittal interclinoidal distance was significantly reduced. (P value=0.028) [7]. Leonardi et al. (2006) also studied 34 individuals with maxillary impacted canine anomalies and determined that there is a relationship between impacted canine and sella turcica bridging, although there are no significant differences based on age or gender [6]. In this investigation as well, we observed no significant association between age and sex. Unlike the current study, Ortiz et al. (2018) discovered no significant relationship between maxillary palatally impacted canine and sella turcica bridging in 38 patients with maxillary palatally impacted canine and 38 patients without any dental anomaly. Maybe their different results from our study are due to their diagnostic radiographic records (cone beam computed tomography images) [14]. In their investigation, El Wak et al. found no significant link between sella turcica bridging and canine impaction, which contradicted our findings[15]. However, despite other research and our investigation revealing a significant relationship, these two studies with small sample sizes found no significant association between canine impaction and sella turcica bridging. There are several theories on the pathophysiologic cause of the association of canine impaction and sella turcica bridging. The Sella turcica is the primary site for neural crest cell migration. Mutations in the Homebox, Hox, or Sonic hedgehog genes have a deleterious impact on the growth of the central section of the face, teeth, and sections of the sella turcica. Because canine teeth and sella turcica originate from the same place, modifications throughout growth and development might result in sella turcica bridging and canine impaction[20, 21]. As a result, this anomaly could be used as a marker, allowing orthodontists and radiologists to detect and predict pituitary gland disorders in this critical location. The scope of our research was constrained by a few variables. The study used lateral cephalograms, which are a two-dimensional representation of a three- dimensional subject with its own set of landmark recognition and tracing errors. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, few patients were involved in our study, but although it resulted in a smaller sample size, this sample size was adequate to obtain proper test power in terms of most variables which were investigated in this study. Further studies in larger communities with different ethnic backgrounds and more thorough examination of the patient's profile (e.g., height, BMI, family history, underlying condition, etc.) and using cone beam computed tomographic records instead of lateral cephalometric records are recommended. Conclusion The results showed that the incidence of sella turcica bridging was greater in individuals with maxillary canine impaction than in the control group. In addition, the interclinoidal distance and canine angle were lower in the study group than in the control group, despite the fact that the depth of the sella turcica and the anterior- posterior diameter of the sella turcica were not substantially different. As a conclusion, palatally canine impaction may be related to the bridging of the sella turcica. Therefore, sella turcica bridging can Associa'on of sella turcica bridging and morphologic characteris'cs with palatally impacted canine in lateral cephalograms. Vol 10 No 1 (2022) DOI 10.5195/d3000.2022.254 h#p://den*stry3000.pi#.edu be used as a diagnostic parameter for palatally canine impaction. Acknowledgement The present study was extracted from a thesis approved and funded by the Faculty of Dentistry of Zanjan University of Medical Sciences (Ethics Code: IR.ZUMS.REC.1398.417). The authors would like to express their gratitude to all staffs who cooperated in this research. References 1. Bridging and dimensions of sella turcica in subjects treated by surgical-orthodon7c means or orthodon7cs only. Jones R, Faqir A, Mille@ D, Moos K, McHugh S. The Angle Orthodon7st. 2005;75(5):714-8. PMID: 16279819. 2. Sella turcica-Its importance in orthodon7cs and craniofacial morphology. Sathyanarayana HP, Kailasam V, Chitharanjan AB. Dental research journal. 2013 Sep;10(5):571. PMID: 24348611 3. Associa7ons among sella turcica bridging, atlas arcuate foramen (pon7culus pos7cus) development, atlas posterior arch deficiency, and the occurrence of palatally displaced canine impac7on. Ghadimi MH, Amini F, Hamedi S, Rakhshan V. American Journal of Orthodon7cs and Dentofacial Orthopedics. 2017;151(3):513- 20. PMID: 28257736 4. Neural crest contribu7on to mammalian tooth forma7on. Mile7ch I, Sharpe PT. Birth Defects Research Part C: Embryo Today: Reviews. 2004;72(2):200- 12. PMID: 15269893 5. Mul7level complex interac7ons between gene7c, epigene7c and environmental factors in the ae7ology of anomalies of dental development. Brook AH. Archives of oral biology. 2009 Dec 1;54:S3-17. PMID: 19913215 6. A sella turcica bridge in subjects with dental anomalies. Leonardi R, Barbato E, Vichi M, Caltabiano M. The European Journal of Orthodon7cs. 2006;28(6):580-5. PMID: 16954179 7. Associa7on between sella turcica bridging and palatal canine impac7on. Ali B, Shaikh A, Fida M. American Journal of Orthodon7cs and Dentofacial Orthopedics. 2014;146(4):437- 41. PMID: 25263146 8. Frequency of impacted teeth and categoriza7on of impacted canines: A retrospec7ve radiographic study using orthopantomograms. Al-Zoubi H, Alharbi AA, Ferguson DJ, Zafar MS. European journal of den7stry. 2017 Jan;11(01):117- 21. PMID: 28435377 9. A survey of 3,874 rou7ne full- mouth radiographs: II. A study of impacted teeth. Dachi SF, Howell FV. Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathology. 1961;14(10):1165-9. PMID: 13883048 10. The ectopic maxillary canine: a review. Bri7sh Journal of Orthodon7cs. Mcsherry PF. 1998;25(3):209-16. PMID: 9800020 11. Is there a rela7onship between third-molar impac7on types and the dimensional/angular measurement values of posterior mandible according to Pell & Gregory/Winter Classifica7on? Gümrükçü Z, Balaban E, Karabağ M. Oral radiology. 2020:1-7. PMID: 31925627 12. Maxillary tooth size varia7on in den77ons with palatal canine displacement. Becker A, Sharabi S, Chaushu S. The European Journal of Orthodon7cs. 2002;24(3):313-8. PMID: 12143095 13. Associations among palatal impaction of canine, sella turcica bridging, and ponticulus posticus (atlas arcuate foramen). Dadgar S, Alimohamadi M, Rajabi N, Rakhshan V, Sobouti F. Surgical and Radiologic Anatomy. 2021;43(1):93-9. PMID: 32816070 14. A CBCT Inves7ga7on of the Associa7on between sella- turcica bridging and maxillary palatal canine impac7on. Or7z PM, Tabbaa S, Flores-Mir C, Al- Jewair T. BioMed research interna7onal. 2018;2018. PMID: 29682544 15. Associa7on between sella turcica bridging and palatal canine impac7on: evalua7on using lateral cephalograms and CBCT. El Wak T, Akl R, Ma7 M, Khoury E, Ghoubril J. Interna7onal orthodon7cs. 2018;16(2):338-48. PMID: 29628424 16. Sella Turcica Morphology on Cephalometric Radiographs and Dental Abnormali7es—Is There Any Associa7on?—Systema7c Review. Jankowski T, Jedliński M, Grocholewicz K, Janiszewska- Olszowska J. Interna7onal Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2021;18(9):4456. PMID: 33922272 17. An associa7on between sella turcica bridging and dental transposi7on. Leonardi R, Farella M, Cobourne MT. The European Journal of Orthodon7cs. 2011;33(4):461-5. PMID: 21212168 18. Skeletal anomalies and normal variants in pa7ents with palatally displaced canines. Leonardi R, Barbato E, Vichi M, Associa'on of sella turcica bridging and morphologic characteris'cs with palatally impacted canine in lateral cephalograms. Vol 10 No 1 (2022) DOI 10.5195/d3000.2022.254 h#p://den*stry3000.pi#.edu Caltabiano M. The Angle Orthodon7st. 2009;79(4):727- 32. PMID: 19537879 19. Associa7on of sella turcica bridging with palatal canine impac7on in skeletal Class I and Class II. Baidas LF, Al-Kawari HM, Al-Obaidan Z, Al-Marhoon A, Al- Shahrani S. Clinical, cosme7c and inves7ga7onal den7stry. 2018;10:179. PMID: 30154673 20. Rela7onship between the maxillary transverse dimension and palatally displaced canines: a cone-beam computed tomographic study. Hong W-H, Radfar R, Chung C-H. The Angle Orthodon7st. 2015;85(3):440-5. PMID: 25098187 21. Role of homeobox genes in the pa@erning, specifica7on, and differen7a7on of ectodermal appendages in mammals. Duverger O, Morasso MI. Journal of cellular physiology. 2008;216(2):337-46. PMID: 18459147