Palatal rugae change shape following orthodontic treatment: a comparison between extraction and non-extraction borderline cases using fractal analysis and 3D superimposition.

INTRODUCTION

Palatal rugae are used as anatomical landmarks on the hard palate, in various clinical applications; in forensics, for insertion of mini-screws, and for superimposition. There is ambiguous evidence on whether they change during orthodontic treatment and to what extent. Therefore, we investigated changes in the shape, complexity, and area occupied by palatal rugae following orthodontic treatment with and without extractions.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Pre- and post-treatment plaster models of maxillae of 28 cases involving first premolar extractions (17 females and 11 males) and 33 non-extraction cases (19 females and 14 males) were scanned and analysed. All participants were selected from a parent sample via discriminant analysis and represent borderline cases. We applied mesh cropping, ball pivoting, distance mapping, contour cropping of rugae, best-fit superimposition, fractal dimension (FD) analysis, and creation of rugae's convex hull area with Viewbox 4 software. The average distance between the closest points of the outlines of pre- and post-treatment palatal rugae (indicating shape change in the set of rugae), disparity in their pre- and post-treatment FDs (reflecting the complexity of their shapes), area occupied by rugae, arch depth, and size of palatal surface were then computed.

RESULTS

The medians of the average distance between pre- and post-treatment outlines after best-fit superimposition were 0.39 mm (interquartile range [IQR]: 0.34-0.51) and 0.27 mm (IQR: 0.22-0.34) mm for the extraction and non-extraction groups, respectively (P < 0.001). The median pre-treatment FDs were 1.497 (IQR: 1.481-1.521) for the extraction group and 1.481 (IQR: 1.456-1.509) for the non-extraction group, whereas their median post-treatment FDs were 1.502 (IQR: 1.472-1.532) and 1.489 (IQR: 1.469-1.501), respectively. The differences between pre- and post-treatment fractal dimensions were not found to be significant, neither within each group, nor across the groups. On the other hand, the surface area occupied by rugae showed a median increase of 14.7 mm2 (IQR: 0.0-46.5) (P = 0.003) following non-extraction treatment only.

CONCLUSION

Palatal rugae change shape during orthodontic treatment, but their shape complexity, as measured by fractal dimensions, remains unaltered. Extraction treatment exerts a more pronounced effect in shape change compared to treatment without extractions. Nevertheless, non-extraction orthodontic treatment increases the surface on which rugae lie, as measured by means of the convex hull. Although the alterations may appear minor, it is necessary to exercise caution and prudence when employing rugae for superimposition and forensic dentistry purposes.