Section Original Articles

An analogy between maxillary anterior teeth dimensions measured using facial proportions and Chu proportion gauge: an in vivo study

An analogy between maxillary anterior teeth dimensions
Sravalli Kodipalli
M Praveen
Ravalika N Kothuri

##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.main##

Abstract

Background: A fine balancing of geometric concepts and artistic abilities is required while designing smiles. One of the key elements that make up the smile frame is tooth size. The maxillary front teeth are the most noticeable in the smile arch, therefore choosing the right tooth size and positioning it in the maxilla improves both aesthetics and treatment outcomes.


Aim: This study aimed to compare the dimensions of maxillary anterior teeth measured with vernier callipers and CHU proportion gauge with facial proportions such as intercanthal distance, interalar width and bizygomatic width.


Materials and Methods: On a sample of 100, Facial proportions, mesiodistal width, and height of maxillary anterior teeth were recorded using digital callipers and a Chu proportion gauge. The recorded data were subjected to statistical analysis. Mean comparisons of each width were done using a t-test, ANOVA and Tukey’s Post-hoc test considering a p-value less than 0.05 to be statistically significant.


Results: Mean values of the combined width of anteriors calculated using Chu gauge was 45.08, and that calculated using Vernier Callipers was 45.85. Multiplying the factor 1.47 to Inner canthal width and 1.42 to Interalar width results in the combined width of the maxillary anterior teeth. A mean difference of 0.02620 ± 0.91777 and 0.4988 ± 0.91777 exists between Inner canthal and Combined Chu’s width with a 0.04% and 0.34% error in younger and elder age populations, respectively. A mean difference of -11.4775 ± 0.91777 and -11.6039 ± 0.91777 exists between Combined mesiodistal width obtained by using Chu’s width and bizygomatic width with a 0.01% error in younger and elder age populations, respectively.


Conclusions: This study reported a negligible 0.7 difference in the means of the combined width of anteriors calculated using Chu gauge and Vernier Callipers. Hence, these two methods can be used as alternatives to calculate the width of anterior teeth.

##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.details##

Author Biographies

Sravalli Kodipalli, Panineeya Mahavidyalaya Institute of Dental Sciences and Research Centre

Department of Prosthodontics, Crown and Bridge & Implantology, Panineeya Mahavidyalaya Institute of Dental Sciences and Research Centre, Hyderabad, Telangana, India

M Praveen, Panineeya Mahavidyalaya Institute of Dental Sciences and Research Centre

Professor, Department of Prosthodontics, Crown and Bridge & Implantology, Panineeya Mahavidyalaya Institute of Dental Sciences and Research Centre, Hyderabad, Telangana, India

Ravalika N Kothuri, Dr. Sekhar's Dental Implant Centre

Researcher and Private Practitioner Clean and Correct Dentistry, Hyderabad, Telangana, India.

CITATION
DOI: 10.37983/IJDM.2022.4301
Published: 2022-08-25
How to Cite
Kodipalli, S., Praveen, M., & Kothuri, R. N. (2022). An analogy between maxillary anterior teeth dimensions measured using facial proportions and Chu proportion gauge: an in vivo study: An analogy between maxillary anterior teeth dimensions. International Journal of Dental Materials, 4(3), 51-57. https://doi.org/10.37983/IJDM.2022.4301

References

  1. Levin EI. Dental esthetics and the golden proportion. J Prosthet Dent 1978; 40:244-52. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(78)90028-8
  2. Varghese P, Cherian B, Sukumaran B, Anu S, Jacob BM, Raja VV. Analysis of geometric proportions on maxillary anterior teeth for esthetic smile design: An In vivo study. J Pharm Bioall Sci 2021;13, Suppl S1:778-82. https://doi.org/10.4103/jpbs.JPBS_808_20
  3. Janu A, Azam A, Tandon R, Chandra P, Kulshrestha R, Umale V. Photographic Evaluation, Analysis and Comparison of Aesthetically Pleasing Smiles: A Prospective Study. Turkish Journal of Orthodontics. 2020; 33(3):177-82. https://doi.org/10.5152/TurkJOrthod.2020.19060
  4. Galip G. Smile designing. In The science and art of porcelain laminates and veneers. Quintessence Publishing Co. Ltd. 2003; pp. 58-109.
  5. Chu SJ. Range and mean distribution frequency of individual tooth width of the maxillary anterior dentition. Pract Proced Aesthet Dent. 2007;19(4):209–215. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1708-8240.2007.00115.x
  6. Preston JD. The golden proportion revisited. J Esthet Dent 1993;5(6):247-51. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1708-8240.1993.tb00788.x
  7. Rosenstiel SF, Ward DH, Rashid RG. Dentists’ preferences of anterior tooth proportion–a web-based study. J Prosthodont 2000;9(3):123-36. https://doi.org/10.1053/jopr.2000.19987
  8. Berry FH. Is the theory of temperaments the foundation of the study of prosthetic art? Dent Mag. 1905;1(405):6-10.
  9. House MM, Loop JL. Form and color harmony in the dental art. Whittier: MM House; 1939.
  10. Scandrett FR, Kerber PE, Umrigar ZR. A clinical evaluation of the techniques to determine the combined width of the maxillary anterior teeth and the maxillary central incisor. J Prosthet Dent 1982;48(1):15-22. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(82)90041-5
  11. Al Wazzan KA. The relationship between intercanthal dimension and the widths of maxillary anterior teeth. J Prosthet Dent 2001;86(6):608-12. https://doi.org/10.1067/mpr.2001.119682
  12. Abdullah MA. Inner canthal distance and geometric progression as a predictor of maxillary central incisor width. J Prosthet Dent 2002;88(1):16-20. https://doi.org/10.1067/mpr.2002.126095
  13. Krajicek DD. Natural appearance for the individual denture patient. J Prosthet Dent 1960;10(2):205-14. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(60)90041-X
  14. Mavroskoufis F, Ritchie GM. Nasal width and incisive papilla as guides for the selection and arrangement of maxillary anterior teeth. J Prosthet Dent 1981;45(6):592-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(81)90417-0
  15. Hoffman W Jr, Bomberg TJ, Hatch RA. Interalar width as a guide in denture tooth selection. J Prosthet Dent 1986;55(2):219-21. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(86)90348-3
  16. Latta GH Jr, Weaver JR, Conkin JE. The relationship between the width of the mouth, interalar width, bizygomatic width and interpupillary distance in edentulous patients. J Prosthet Dent 1991; 65(2):250-4. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(91)90170-2
  17. Black GV. Descriptive anatomy of the human teeth. 4th ed. Philadelphia, PA: S.S.White Dental Manufacturing Co; 1897.
  18. Al-el-sheikh HM, Al-Athel MS. The Relationship of Interalar Width, Interpupillary Width And Maxillary Anterior Teeth Width In Saudi Population Odontostomatol Trop. 1998;21(84):7-10.
  19. Ufuk Hasanreisoglu et al. An analysis of maxillary anterior teeth: facial and dental proportions J Prosthet Dent 2005;94(6):530-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2005.10.007
  20. Vanderlei luiz gomes et al. Interalar Distance to Estimate the Combined Width of the Six Maxillary Anterior Teeth in Oral Rehabilitation. Treatment J Esthet Restor Dent 2009;21(1):26-35. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1708-8240.2008.00227.x
  21. George S. Inner canthal distance and golden proportion as predictors of maxillary central incisor width in south Indian population. Indian J Dent Res 2010;21(4):491-5. https://doi.org/10.4103/0970-9290.74214
  22. Chhagan V et al. The relationship between innercanthal dimension and interalar width to the intercanine width of maxillary anterior teeth in central Indian population. J Indian Prosthodont Soc 2015;15(2):91-7. https://doi.org/10.4103/0972-4052.155028
  23. Ewa C et al. Comparison of maxillary anterior tooth width and facial dimensions of 3 ethnicities J Prosthet Dent 2017;118(4):504-10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2016.10.035
  24. Wang Y, Song Y, Zhong Q, Xu C. Evaluation of influence factors on the width, length, and width to length ratio of the maxillary central incisor: A systematic review and meta?analysis. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2021;33(2):351-63. https://doi.org/10.1111/jerd.12606
  25. Wagh SA, Mantri SS, Bhasin A. Evaluation of maxillary anterior teeth proportion with Chu’s Gauge in a population of Central India: an in vivo study. Medicine and Pharmacy Reports. 2020;93(1):75-80. https://doi.org/10.15386/mpr-1309