International Journal of Prosthodontics and Restorative Dentistry

Register      Login

VOLUME 7 , ISSUE 4 ( October-December, 2017 ) > List of Articles

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Correlation between Intercanthal, Interpupillary, Interalar, and Intercommissural Distance with the Mesiodistal Width of the Maxillary Anteriors: An in vivo Study

Bhushan Bangar, Prashant L Nakade, Ajit Jankar, Suresh Kamble

Citation Information : Bangar B, Nakade PL, Jankar A, Kamble S. Correlation between Intercanthal, Interpupillary, Interalar, and Intercommissural Distance with the Mesiodistal Width of the Maxillary Anteriors: An in vivo Study. Int J Prosthodont Restor Dent 2017; 7 (4):109-113.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10019-1187

License: CC BY 3.0

Published Online: 01-12-2017

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2017; Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) Ltd.


Abstract

Aim

This study was conducted for the selection of artificial teeth for edentulous patients with the help of extraoral facial measurement.

Materials and methods

The intercanthal distance, interpupillary distance, interalar distance, intercommissural distance, and width of maxillary six anteriors from a total of 250 subjects were measured clinically. The measurements were made with the help of a digital caliper. Student's t-test was used to find the significance of parameters between male and female. Pearson correlation has been used to find the relation of the parameters.

Results

The total mean of 125 male subjects for intercanthal distance, interpupillary distance, interalar distance, intercommissural distance, and intercanine width was 31.58, 62.27, 34.77, 48.87, and 50.22 mm respectively. However, the total mean of 125 female subjects for intercanthal distance, interpupillary distance, interalar distance, intercommissural distance, intercanine width was 30.58, 61.48, 34.58, 48.20, and 49.34 mm respectively. The paired t-test showed highly significant results in relation to intercanthal distance and width of maxillary six anteriors. However, interalar distance was found to be nonsignificant and interpupillary and intercommissural distance was significant.

Conclusion

It can be concluded that although various methods for the selection of teeth are used, the applicability can vary due to the ethnic differences between populations. The multiplication factor for intercanthal distance, interpupillary distance, interalar distance, intercommissural distance was 1.6, 0.8, 1.4, and 1 in order to obtain the mesiodistal width of maxillary six anteriors respectively, in males and females. The values were greater for men than for women. No significant differences were found between sexes with respect to intercanthal distance.

Clinical significance

Although there are ethnic differences between populations, the proportions/relationships of anatomical landmarks to the teeth remain the same, which helps in the selection of artificial teeth for edentulous patients.

How to cite this article

Bangar B, Nakade PL, Jankar A, Kamble S. Correlation between Intercanthal, Interpupillary, Interalar, and Intercommissural Distance with the Mesiodistal Width of the Maxillary Anteriors: An in vivo Study. Int J Prosthodont Restor Dent 2017;7(4):109-113.


  1. Correlation between facial measurements and the mesiodistal width of the maxillary anterior teeth. Indian J Dental Sci 2012 Sep;4(3):20-24.
  2. Esthetics for denture patients. J Prosthet Dent 1980 Dec;44(6):608-613.
  3. Intercanthal distance of a Sudanese population sample as a reference for selection of maxillary anterior teeth size. Sudan JMS 2010 Jun;5(2):117-122.
  4. An in vivo clinical study of facial measurements for anterior teeth selection. Ann Essences Dent 2012 Jan-Mar;4(1):1-6.
  5. The interpupillary distance and the inner and outer intercanthal distances. Eur J Sci Res 2015 Jun;3(1):001-003.
  6. Correlation between innercanthal distance and the mesiodistal width of the maxillary central incisors. IMJ 2015 Sep;7(3):138-141.
  7. The role of interpupillary distance in the selection of anterior teeth. Pak Oral Dent J 2012 Apr;32(1):165-169.
  8. The relationship between intercanthal dimension and the widths of maxillary anterior teeth. J Prosthet Dent 2001 Dec;86(6):608-612.
  9. Normal inner canthal and outer orbital dimensions. J Pediatr 1969 Mar;74(3):465-468.
  10. The significance of inner canthal distance in prosthodontics. Saudi Dent J 1997 Jan-Apr;9(1):36-39.
  11. Inner intercanthal and interorbital distances. J Maxillofac Surg 1980 Nov;8(4):324-326.
  12. Intercanthal and interpupillary distance in the black population. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1990 Jun;69(6):676-680.
  13. Relationship between the mesiodistal width of the maxillary central incisor and interpupillary distance. J Prosthet Dent 1984 Nov;52(5):641-643.
  14. An analysis of maxillary anterior teeth: facial and dental proportions. J Prosthet Dent 2005 Dec;94(6):530-538.
  15. Interalar width as a guide in denture tooth selection. J Prosthet Dent 1986 Feb;55(2):219-221.
  16. The relationship between the width of the mouth, interalar width, bizygomatic width, and interpupillary distance in edentulous patients. J Prosthet Dent 1991 Feb;65(2):250-254.
  17. Nasal width and incisive papilla as guides for the selection and arrangement of maxillary anterior teeth. J Prosthet Dent 1981 Jun;45(6):592-597.
  18. Correlation between facial measurements and the mesiodistal width of the maxillary anterior teeth. J Esthet Restor Dent 2006 Jul-Aug;18(4):196-205.
  19. Correlation between combined width of maxillary anterior teeth, interpupillary distance and intercommissural width in a group of Indian people. Int J Prosthodont Restor Dent 2014 Oct-Dec;4(4):105-111.
  20. An analysis of selected normative tooth proportions. Int J Prosthodont 1994 Sep-Oct;7(5):410-417.
  21. Width/length ratios of normal clinical crowns of the maxillary anterior dentition in man. J Clin Periodontol 1999 Mar;26(3):153-157.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.