Journal article

Publication year: 2008

Pages: 309-316

Journal: Angle Orthodontist

Volume number: 78

Issue number: 2

ISSN: 0003-3219

eISSN: 1945-7103

Open access status: Gold

DOI Link: https://doi.org/10.2319/030807-117.1

Publisher: E.H Angle Education and Research Foundation

Abstract: 

Objective: To test the null hypothesis that there is no difference between premolar position visualized on panoramic radiographs (PRs) and lateral headfilms (LHs).

Materials and Methods: The prevalence of differences in the direction of crown angulation between PR and LH was assessed. Furthermore, brass wire markers with different sagittal and transverse angulations were placed in a dry skull. With the markers in place, LHs and PRs were taken.

Results: A difference in the direction of crown angulation of unerupted second premolars between PR and LH occurred in 19.5% of patients. The reason for the angulation differences is a buccolingual orientation of the tooth, which appears as a mesiodistal angulation on the PR.

Conclusion: The null hypothesis was rejected since in one-fifth of the patients premolar projection differs between the panoramic radiograph and the lateral headfilm.

Harvard Citation style: Nohadani, N., Pohl, Y. and Ruf, S. (2008) Displaced premolars in panoramic radiography - Fact or fallacy?, Angle Orthodontist, 78(2), pp. 309-316. https://doi.org/10.2319/030807-117.1

APA Citation style: Nohadani, N., Pohl, Y., & Ruf, S. (2008). Displaced premolars in panoramic radiography - Fact or fallacy?. Angle Orthodontist. 78(2), 309-316. https://doi.org/10.2319/030807-117.1