Revista de Odontologia da UNESP
https://revodontolunesp.com.br/article/doi/10.1590/1807-2577.02524
Revista de Odontologia da UNESP
Original Article

Analysis of coherence between Vertical Dimension of Occlusion (VDO) obtained clinically and through cephalometric analysis. A cross-sectional study

Análise da coerência entre Dimensão Vertical de Oclusão (DVO) estabelecida clinicamente e por análise cefalométrica. Estudo transversal

Marcelo Noboru TANIZAKA; Elisa Mattias SARTORI; Farid Jamil Silva de ARRUDA; Eduardo Romagna MACHADO; Ana Cláudia Moreira Melo TOYOFUKU; Ivete Aparecida de Mattias SARTORI

http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1807-2577.02524 Rev. odontol. UNESP, vol.53, e20240025, 2024
PDF
Downloads: 0
Views: 49

Abstract

Introduction: Determining the VDO is one of the most important requirements in restorative dentistry, as it is crucial for good aesthetic and functional harmony. However, due to its empirical nature, a combination of methods is clinically recommended, and cephalometric analysis is one of the procedures available.

Objective: The objective of this study is to evaluate the coherence between VDO clinically established with VDO determined in Seraidarian-Tavano cephalometric analysis in completely edentulous patients.

Material and method: Registrations were carried out on completely edentulous patients using a combination of clinically recommended methods (metric method from VDR, swallowing method, and facial fullness method). With the registration in the mouth, lateral cephalometric X-ray images were taken with the patient in occlusion for cephalometric analysis.

Result: The sample consisted of 18 patients, 11 females (61.1%) and 7 males (38.9%) with a mean age of 65.8 ± 1.9 years. For the 18 patients, the mean measurements of the upper and middle angles were 54.1 and 54.0, respectively. No statistically significant difference was found between the two angles (p 0.772). These results show that the VDO considered ideal from a clinical point of view was confirmed by the cephalometric analysis used.

Conclusion: Based on the data, it seems fair to conclude that the tested cephalometric analysis can be a method used to assist the clinical determination of VDO.

Keywords

Vertical dimension of occlusion; dentures; dental occlusion; cephalometric analysis

Resumo

Introdução: A determinação da Dimensão Vertical de Oclusão (DVO) é um dos requisitos mais importantes na Odontologia estauradora, já que é essencial para a boa estética e função. Entretanto, devido à sua natureza empírica uma combinação de métodos é clinicamente recomendada, e a análise cefalométrica é um dos procedimentos disponíveis.

Objetivo: O objetivo deste estudo é avaliar a coerência entre a DVO estabelecida clinicamente e a DVO determinada pela análise cefalométrica Seraidarian-Tavano em pacientes completamente edêntulos.

Material e método: Foram realizados registros em pacientes desdentados totais usando uma combinação de métodos recomendados para determinação clínica da DVO (método métrico, método da deglutição e método da plenitude facial). Com os registros em boca, foram realizadas teleradiografias perfil estando os pacientes em oclusão.

Resultado: A amostra foi composta por 18 pacientes, 11 mulheres (61.1%) e 7 homens (38,9%) com idade média de 65,8 ± 1,9 anos. Para os 18 pacientes, a média das medidas dos ângulos superiores e médios foram 54,1 e 54,0, respectivamente. Não foi encontrada diferença estatisticamente significante entre os dois ângulos (p 0,772).

Conclusão: Com base nos dados, parece lícito concluir que a análise cefalométrica aqui testada pode ser um método utilizado para auxiliar na determinação clínica da DVO.

Palavras-chave

Dimensão vertical de oclusão; dentadura; oclusão dental; análise cefalométrica

References

1 The Academy of Prosthodontics. The glossary of prosthodontic terms: ninth edition. J Prosthet Dent. 2017 May;117(5):C1-105. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2016.12.001. PMid:28418832.

2 Alhajj MN, Khalifa N, Abduo J, Amran AG, Ismail IA. Determination of occlusal vertical dimension for complete dentures patients: an updated review. J Oral Rehabil. 2017 Nov;44(11):896-907. http://doi.org/10.1111/joor.12522. PMid:28600914.

3 Abduo J, Lyons K. Clinical considerations for increasing occlusal vertical dimension: a review. Aust Dent J. 2012 Mar;57(1):2-10. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1834-7819.2011.01640.x. PMid:22369551.

4 Calamita M, Coachman C, Sesma N, Kois J. Occlusal vertical dimension: treatment planning decisions and management considerations. Int J Esthet Dent. 2019;14(2):166-81. PMid:31061997.

5 Mohindra NK, Bulman JS. The effect of increasing vertical dimension of occlusion on facial aesthetics. Br Dent J. 2002 Feb;192(3):164-8. http://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.4801324. PMid:11863155.

6 Goldstein G, Goodacre C, MacGregor K. Occlusal Vertical Dimension: best evidence consensus statement. J Prosthodont. 2021 Apr;30(S1):12-9. http://doi.org/10.1111/jopr.13315. PMid:33783090.

7 Aradya A, Chowdhary R. Re-evaluation of interarch space determination in fully dentate adults with different facial forms: a clinical study. Indian J Dent Res. 2017 Nov-Dec;28(6):613-6. http://doi.org/10.4103/ijdr.IJDR_625_15. PMid:29256457.

8 Edwards CL, Richards MW, Billy EJ, Neilans LC. Using computerized cephalometrics to analyze the vertical dimension of occlusion. Int J Prosthodont. 1993 Jul-Aug;6(4):371-6. PMid:8240648.

9 Orthlieb JD, Laurent M, Laplanche O. Cephalometric estimation of vertical dimension of occlusion. J Oral Rehabil. 2000 Sep;27(9):802-7. http://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2842.2000.00592.x. PMid:11012856.

10 Vinnakota DN, Edamadaka N, Reddy PS, Duggineni CR. Comparison of patient satisfaction between complete dentures fabricated using “conventional” and “cephalometric angular reconstruction” vertical dimension procedures: a multicenter randomized clinical trial. J Indian Prosthodont Soc. 2022 Jan-Mar;22(1):82-91. http://doi.org/10.4103/jips.jips_336_21. PMid:36510951.

11 Yamashita S, Shimizu M, Katada H. A Newly proposed method to predict optimum occlusal vertical dimension. J Prosthodont. 2015 Jun;24(4):287-90. http://doi.org/10.1111/jopr.12223. PMid:25251764.

12 Enkling N, Enkling-Scholl J, Albrecht D, Bornstein MM, Schimmel M. Determination of the occlusal vertical dimension in edentulous patients using lateral cephalograms. J Oral Rehabil. 2018 May;45(5):399-405. http://doi.org/10.1111/joor.12624. PMid:29573454.

13 Tavano KT, Seraidarian PI, de Oliveira DD, Jansen WC. Determination of vertical dimension of occlusion in dentate patients by cephalometric analysis: pilot study. Gerodontology. 2012 Jun;29(2):e297-305. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-2358.2011.00469.x. PMid:21323984.

14 LeSage BP. CAD/CAM: applications for transitional bonding to restore occlusal vertical dimension. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2020 Mar;32(2):132-40. http://doi.org/10.1111/jerd.12554. PMid:31823502.

15 Kraft B, Valenga J Fo, Kluppel LE, Vieira RA, Sartori EM, Sartori IAM. Resolução de má-oclusão classe II de Angle, padrão face longa, com próteses implantossuportada. Implant News. 2020;5(5):778-88.

16 Reich S, Hartkamp O, Reiss B. A chairside concept for increasing the vertical dimension of occlusion in the maxilla and mandible. Int J Comput Dent. 2019;22(1):81-98. PMid:30848257.

17 Galeković NH, Fugošić V, Braut V, Ćelić R. Reproducibility of centric relation techniques by means of condyle position analysis. Acta Stomatol Croat. 2017 Mar;51(1):13-21. http://doi.org/10.15644/asc51/1/2. PMid:28740266.

18 Kattadiyil MT, Alzaid AA, Campbell SD. What materials and reproducible techniques may be used in recording centric relation? Best evidence consensus statement. J Prosthodont. 2021 Apr;30(S1):34-42. http://doi.org/10.1111/jopr.13321. PMid:33783085.

19 Vinnakota DN, Kamatham R. Estimation of occlusal vertical dimension using cephalometric angular reconstruction. Indian J Dent Res. 2021 Jan-Feb;32(1):31-4. http://doi.org/10.4103/ijdr.IJDR_783_18. PMid:34269233.

20 Uma M, Shetty R, Shenoy KK. Cephalometric: evaluation of influence of edentulousness on mandibular morphology: a comparative study. J Indian Prosthodont Soc. 2013 Sep;13(3):269-73. http://doi.org/10.1007/s13191-012-0213-y. PMid:24431746.

21 Huumonen S, Sipilä K, Haikola B, Tapio M, Söderholm AL, Remes-Lyly T, et al. Influence of edentulousness on gonial angle, ramus and condylar height. J Oral Rehabil. 2010 Jan;37(1):34-8. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2842.2009.02022.x. PMid:19912483.

22 Bassi F, Deregibus A, Previgliano V, Bracco P, Preti G. Evaluation of the utility of cephalometric parameters in constructing complete denture. Part I: placement of posterior teeth. J Oral Rehabil. 2001 Mar;28(3):234-8. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2842.2001.00667.x. PMid:11350578.

23 Bassi F, Rizzatti A, Schierano G, Preti G. Evaluation of the utility of cephalometric parameters in constructing complete denture. Part II: placement of anterior teeth. J Oral Rehabil. 2001 Apr;28(4):349-53. http://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2842.2001.00668.x. PMid:11350588.
 

Submitted date:
09/20/2024

Accepted date:
09/26/2024

67335d73a953956449681ae5 rou Articles
Links & Downloads
1807-2577 (Electronic)
Rev. odontol. UNESP ©2024 All rights reserved.

Rev. odontol. UNESP

Share this page
Page Sections