References

Hägg U, Taranger J. Timing of tooth emergence. A prospective longitudinal study of Swedish urban children from birth to 18 years. Swed Dent J. 1986; 10:195-206
Becker A, Chaushu S. Etiology of maxillary canine impaction: a review. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2015; 148:557-567
Stivaros N, Mandall N. Radiographic factors affecting the management of impacted upper permanent canines. J Orthod. 2000; 27:169-173
Peck S, Peck L, Kataja M. The palatally displaced canine as a dental anomaly of genetic origin. Angle Orthod. 1994; 64:249-256
Ericson S, Kurol J. Resorption of incisors after ectopic eruption of maxillary canines. A CT study. Angle Orthod. 2000; 70:415-423
McNair A, Morris D.London: British Orthodontic Society; 2010
Counihan K, Al-Awadhi EA, Butler J. Guidelines for the assessment of the impacted maxillary canine. Dent Update. 2013; 40:770-777
Husain J, Burden D, McSherry P.: Royal College of Surgeons (Eng), Faculty of Dental Surgery; 2016
Parkin N, Bazargani F, Benson PE, Atwal A. Interventions for promoting the eruption of palatally displaced permanent canine teeth, without the need for surgical exposure, in children aged 9 to 14 years (protocol). Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017; (10)
Naoumova J, Kurol J, Kjellberg H. Extraction of the deciduous canine as an interruptive treatment in children with palatal displaced canines – part I: shall we extract the deciduous canine or not?. Eur J Orthod. 2015; 37:209-218
Bazargani F, Magnuson A, Lennartsson B. Effect of interceptive extraction of deciduous canine on palatally displaced maxillary canine: a prospective randomized controlled study. Angle Orthod. 2014; 84:3-10
Parkin N, Benson PE, Thind B, Shah A, Khalil I, Ghafoor S. Open versus closed surgical exposure of canine teeth that are displaced in the roof of the mouth. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017; (8)
Woloshyn H, Artun J, Kennedy D, Joondeph D. Pulpal and periodontal reactions to orthodontic alignment of palatally impacted canines. Angle Orthod. 1994; 64:257-264
Parkin N, Freeman J, Deery C, Benson P. Esthetic judgements of palatally displaced canines 3 months postdebond after surgical exposure with either a closed or an open technique. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2015; 147:173-181
Bazargani F, Magnuson A, Dolati A, Lennartsson B. Palatally displaced maxillary canines: factors influencing duration and cost of treatment. Eur J Orthod. 2013; 35:310-316
Thornton L. Anterior guidance: group function/canine guidance. A literature review. J Prosthet Dent. 1990; 64:479-482
Bishara S. Impacted maxillary canines: a review. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1992; 101:159-171
Robinson S, Chan M. New teeth from old: treatment options for retained primary teeth. Br Dent J. 2009; 207:315-320
Pjetursson B, Tan W, Tan K, Brägger U, Zwahlen M, Lang N. A systematic review of the survival and complication rates of resin-bonded bridges after an observation period of at least 5 years. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2008; 19:131-141
Wei Y, Wang X, Zhang Q, Li X, Blatz M, Jian Y, Zhao K. Clinical performance of anterior resin-bonded fixed dental prostheses with different framework designs: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Dent. 2016; 47:1-7
Heinlein W. Anterior teeth: esthetics and function. J Prosthet Dent. 1980; 44:389-393
Chen P, Yu S, Zhu G. The psychosocial impacts of implantation on the dental aesthetics of missing anterior teeth patients. Br Dent J. 2012; 213
Rosa M, Lucchi P, Ferrari S, Zachrisson BU, Caprioglio A. Congenitally missing maxillary lateral incisors: long-term periodontal and functional evaluation after orthodontic space closure with first premolar intrusion and canine extrusion. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2016; 149:339-348
Cobourne M, DiBiase A., 2nd edn. London: Elsevier; 2015
Mirabella D, Giunta G, Lombardo L. Substitution of impacted canines by maxillary first premolars: a valid alternative to traditional orthodontic treatment. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2013; 143:125-133
Thiruvenkatachari B, Javidi H, Griffiths S, Shah A, Sandler J. Extraction of maxillary canines: esthetic perceptions of patients smiles among dental professionals and laypeople. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2017; 152:509-515

The Management and ‘Fate’ of Palatally Ectopic Maxillary Canines

From Volume 47, Issue 2, February 2020 | Pages 153-161

Authors

Leonie Seager

BDS, MFDS, MSc MOrth, RCS Ed

Specialist Orthodontist, Shrewsbury Orthodontic Centre and Royal Stoke University Hospital

Articles by Leonie Seager

Email Leonie Seager

Jinesh Shah

BDS, MFDS RCS(Edin), MClinDent(Shef), MOrth RCS(Edin), FDS(Orth) RCS(Edin), FDS RCS(Eng)

Professor and Head of School, Department of Restorative Dentistry, Liverpool University Dental Hospital, Pembroke Place, Liverpool, L3 5PS, UK

Articles by Jinesh Shah

FJ Trevor Burke

DDS, MSc, MDS, MGDS, FDS (RCS Edin), FDS RCS (Eng), FCG Dent, FADM,

Articles by FJ Trevor Burke

Abstract

With the exception of third molar teeth, the maxillary canine is the most frequently impacted tooth, with the majority of these being palatally ectopic. When patients present with impacted canines there can often be several treatment options available to them. These could include interceptive treatment, exposure and alignment of the canine, extraction of the impacted tooth or acceptance of the deciduous canine. It is important that treatment decisions determining the ‘fate’ of palatally impacted canines should be taken on a case-by-case basis.

CPD/Clinical Relevance: The clinician should understand that several options might be available to the patient presenting with a palatally ectopic maxillary canine, in order to allow an informed choice of treatment.

Article

The maxillary canine tooth is usually one of the last teeth of the permanent dentition to erupt, normally between the age of 11 and 12 years.1 With the exception of third molar teeth, the maxillary canine is the most frequently impacted tooth, with a prevalence between 0.2%−2.8%, affecting female subjects 2.3−3 times more frequently than males.2

The majority of maxillary impacted canines are also ectopic, with literature showing 61% to be palatal and 35% buccal to the line of the arch.3

The exact aetiology of palatal maxillary canine ectopia is unknown, although four distinct groupings of causation have been described:2

It is thought that the strongest influence for palatal canine impaction relates to local factors. The ‘guidance theory’ suggests that the lateral incisor is an important contributor to canine ectopia owing to a loss in guidance for the eruption path of the canine, which is the longest in the dentition, at a distance of 22 mm. This theory is supported by a significantly increased incidence of maxillary canine impactions in patients with missing, peg-shaped or microdont lateral incisors.2

Register now to continue reading

Thank you for visiting Dental Update and reading some of our resources. To read more, please register today. You’ll enjoy the following great benefits:

What's included

  • Up to 2 free articles per month
  • New content available