The purpose of this study was to measure the long-term growth of the mandible in miniature pigs using 3D Cone-Beam Computerized Tomography (CBCT). The mandibles of the pigs were scanned monthly over 12 months using CBCT and the 3D mandibular models were reconstructed from the data. Seventeen anatomical landmarks were identified and classified into four groups of line segments, namely anteroposterior, superoinferior, mediolateral and anteroinferior. The inter-marker distances, inter-segmental angles, volume, monthly distance changes and percentage of changes were calculated to describe mandibular growth. The total changes of inter-marker distances were normalized to the initial values. All inter-marker distances increased over time, with the greatest mean normalized total changes in the superoinferior and anteroposterior groups (p<0.05). Monthly distance changes were greatest during the first four months and then reduced over time. Percentages of inter-marker distance changes were similar among the groups, reaching half of the overall growth around the 4th month. The mandibular volume growth increased non-linearly with time, accelerating during the first five months and slowing during the remaining months. The growth of the mandible was found to be anisotropic and non-homogeneous within the bone and non-linear over time, with faster growth in the ramus than in the body. These growth patterns appeared to be related to the development of the dentition, providing necessary space for the teeth to grow upward for occlusion and for the posterior teeth to erupt.
References
[1]
Leander D (2011) Role of Growth Factors in the Development of Mandible. Journal of Indian Orthodontic Society 45: 51–60. doi: 10.5005/jp-journals-10021-1010
[2]
Bj?rk A (1955) Facial Growth in Man, Studied with the AID of Metallic Implants. Acta Odontol Scand 13: 9–34. doi: 10.3109/00016355509028170
[3]
Bj?rk A (1963) Variations in the Growth Pattern of the Human Mandible: Longitudinal Radiographic Study by the Implant Method. J Dent Res 42: 400–411. doi: 10.1177/00220345630420014701
[4]
Bj?rk A (1968) The use of metallic implants in the study of facial growth in children: Method and application. Am J Phys Anthropol 29: 243–254. doi: 10.1002/ajpa.1330290217
[5]
Kim I, Duncan WJ, Farella M (2012) Evaluation of mandibular growth using cone-beam computed tomography in a rabbit model: a pilot study. New Zeal Dent J 108: 9–13.
[6]
Bang S, Enlow DH (1967) Postnatal growth of the rabbit mandible. Arch Oral Biol 12: 993–998. doi: 10.1016/0003-9969(67)90094-5
[7]
Krarup S, Darvann TA, Larsen P, Marsh JL, Kreiborg S (2005) Three-dimensional analysis of mandibular growth and tooth eruption. J Anat 207: 669–682. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-7580.2005.00479.x
[8]
Kuboki T, Shinoda M, Orsini MG, Yamashita A (1997) Viscoelastic Properties of the Pig Temporomandibular Joint Articular Soft Tissues of the Condyle and Disc. J Dent Res 76: 1760–1769. doi: 10.1177/00220345970760110701
[9]
Koppe T, Rossmann P, Ohkawa Y, Schumacher GH, Nagai H (1997) The course of the mandibular canal in the growing miniature pig. Okajimas Folia Anat Jpn 74: 39–52. doi: 10.2535/ofaj1936.74.1_39
[10]
Obrez A (1996) Mandibular molar teeth and the development of mastication in the miniature pig (Sus scrofa). Acta anatomica 156: 99–111. doi: 10.1159/000147834
[11]
Erdfelder E, Faul F, Buchner A (1996) GPOWER: A general power analysis program. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers 28: 1–11. doi: 10.3758/bf03203630
[12]
Schulze D, Heiland M, Thurmann H, Adam G (2004) Radiation exposure during midfacial imaging using 4- and 16-slice computed tomography, cone beam computed tomography systems and conventional radiography. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 33: 83–86. doi: 10.1259/dmfr/28403350
[13]
Scaf G, Lurie AG, Mosier KM, Kantor ML, Ramsby GR, et al. (1997) Dosimetry and cost of imaging osseointegrated implants with film-based and computed tomography. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 83: 41–48. doi: 10.1016/s1079-2104(97)90089-5
[14]
Dula K, Mini R, van der Stelt PF, Lambrecht JT, Schneeberger P, et al. (1996) Hypothetical mortality risk associated with spiral computed tomography of the maxilla and mandible. European Journal of Oral Sciences 104: 503–510. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0722.1996.tb00133.x
[15]
Ngan DC, Kharbanda OP, Geenty JP, Darendeliler MA (2003) Comparison of radiation levels from computed tomography and conventional dental radiographs. Australian orthodontic journal 19: 67–75.
[16]
Roberts JA, Drage NA, Davies J, Thomas DW (2009) Effective dose from cone beam CT examinations in dentistry. Brit J Radiol 82: 35–40. doi: 10.1259/bjr/31419627
[17]
Wei-Ming C, Pey-Hwa W, Hao-Hueng C, Yung-Yi S (1999) Studies on the Eruptive Teeth Sequence in Small-Ear Lee-Sung Strain Miniature Pig. Journal-Chinese Society of Animal Science 28: 347–358.
[18]
Bareggi R, Sandrucci MA, Baldini G, Grill V, Zweyer M, et al. (1995) Mandibular growth rates in human fetal development. Arch Oral Biol 40: 119–125. doi: 10.1016/0003-9969(94)00142-x
[19]
Wrixon AD (2008) New ICRP recommendations. Journal of Radiological Protection 28: 161. doi: 10.1088/0952-4746/28/2/r02
[20]
(2007) Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection ICRP Publication 103. Ann ICRP 37..