Article Menu

Export Article

More by Authors Links

Article Data

  • Views 4118
  • Dowloads 475

Original Research

Open Access

Maxillary Labial Frenum in Preschool Children: Variations, Anomalies and Associated Factors

  • Paulo Floriani Kramer1,2
  • Lívia Mund de Amorim3
  • Nilton de Moura Alves3
  • Henrique Castilhos Ruschel1
  • Juliane Bervian4
  • Carlos Alberto Feldens1,*,

1Department of Pediatric Dentistry, Universidade Luterana do Brasil, Canoas, Brazil

2Department of Pediatric Dentistry, Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, Brazil

3Graduate Program in Dentistry, Universidade Luterana do Brasil, Canoas, Brazil

4School of Dentistry, Universidade de Passo Fundo, Passo Fundo, Brazil

DOI: 10.17796/1053-4625-46.1.9 Vol.46,Issue 1,January 2022 pp.51-57

Published: 01 January 2022

*Corresponding Author(s): Carlos Alberto Feldens E-mail: cafeldens@gmail.com

PDF (384.78 kB) View Full-text

Abstract

Objective: To investigate the prevalence of morphological and attachment variations of the maxillary labial frenum (MLF) and associated factors in preschool children. Study Design: A cross-sectional study was conducted with 1,313 children aged between zero and five years of age attending public nurseries in the city of Canoas in southern Brazil. Data were collected through a questionnaire addressing demographic, socioeconomic, and behavioral characteristics and a clinical examination of the MLF. Assessments of MLF morphology and attachment were based on the classification systems proposed by Sewerin and Mirko et al., respectively. Results: The most prevalent patterns were simple MLF (63.8%) and gingival attachment (51.1%). Morphological abnormalities were found in 21.6% of the preschoolers and 25.4% exhibited abnormal frenal attachment. Abnormalities in MLF morphology were more prevalent among girls (p = 0.003) and a significant reduction was found with the increase in age (p < 0.001). Attachment abnormalities were significantly more prevalent among girls (p < 0.001), the white ethnic group (p = 0.005), and children who used a pacifier (p = 0.007) and also reduced significantly with the increase in age (p < 0.001). Conclusion: Demographic and behavioral characteristics were associated with MLF morphology and attachment. The reduction in the prevalence of the outcomes with the increase in age suggests that surgical interventions in the first years of life may constitute overtreatment.


Keywords

Labial frenum; Child; Epidemiology

Cite and Share

Paulo Floriani Kramer,Lívia Mund de Amorim,Nilton de Moura Alves,Henrique Castilhos Ruschel,Juliane Bervian,Carlos Alberto Feldens. Maxillary Labial Frenum in Preschool Children: Variations, Anomalies and Associated Factors. Journal of Clinical Pediatric Dentistry. 2022. 46(1);51-57.

URL:

https://www.jjocpd.com/articles/10.17796/1053-4625-46.1.9

References

1. Delli K, Livas C, Sculean A, Katsaros C, Bornstein MM. Facts and myths regarding the maxillary midline frenum and its treatment: a systematic review of the literature. Quintessence Int. 2013;44(2):177-187.

2. Kotlow LA. Diagnosing and understandig lip-tie (superior labial, the maxillary labial frenum) as it relates to breastfeeding. J Hum Lact. 2013;29(4):458-464.

3. Townsend JA, Brannon RB, Cheramie T, Hagan J. Prevalence and variations of the median maxillary labial frenum in children, adolescents, and adults in a diverse population. Gen Dent. 2013;61(2):57-60.

4. Santa Maria C, Aby J, Truong MT, Thakur Y, Rea S, Messner A. The superior labial frenum in newborns: What is normal? Glob Pediatr Health. 2017;4:1-6.

5. Biradar SM, Patil AY, Kotnoor SS, Bacha S, Bijjaragi SC, Kattimani PT. Assessment of diverse frenal morphology in primary, mixed, and permanent dentition: A prevalence study. J Contemp Dent Pract. 2020;21(5):562-567.

6. Pransky SM, Lago D, Hong P. Breastfeeding difficulties and oral cavity anomalies: The influence of posterior ankyloglossia and upper-lip ties. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. 2015;79(10):1714-1717.

7. Gkantidis N, Kolokitha O-E, Topouzelis N. Management of maxillary midline diastema with emphasis on etiology. J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2008;32(4):265-272.

8. Sekar R, Mungara J, Joseph E. To determine the prevalence of maxillary labial and mandibular lingual frenum and its relationship between the upper midline space and to clinically assess the maxillary labial frenum morphology in 3 to 14 years children of Chennai city. Glob J Res Anal. 2019;8(2):136-140.

9. Sewerin IP. Prevalence of variations and anomalies of the upper labial frenum. Acta Odontol Scand. 1971;29(4):487-496.

10. Mirko P, Miroslav S, Lubor M. Significance of the labial frenum attachment in periodontal disease in man. Part I. Classification and epidemiology of the labial frenum attachment. J Periodontol. 1974;45(12):891-894.

11. Díaz-Pízan ME, Lagravère MO, Villena R. Midline diastema and frenum morphology in the primary dentition. J Dent Child. 2006;73(1):11-14.

12. Nagaveni, N; Umashankara K. Morphology of maxillary labial frenum in primary, mixed, and permanent dentition of Indian children. J Cranio Max Dis. 2014;3(1):5-10.

13. PT J, Thakur H, Galhotra A, Galhotra V, Gupta N. Maxillary labial frenum morphology and midline diastema among 3 to 12-year-old schoolgoing children in Sri Ganganagar city: A cross-sectional study. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent. 2018; 36(3): 234-239.

14. Christabel SL, Gurunathan D. Prevalence of type of frenal attachment and morphology of frenum in children, Chennai, Tamil Nadu. World J Dent. 2015;6(4): 203-207.

15. Seraj B, Shahrabi M, Masoumi S, Jabbarian R, Manesh AA, Fini MB. Studying maxillary labial frenulum types and their effect on median diastema in 3-6-year-old children in Tehran kindergartens. World J Dent. 2019;10(2):93-97.

16. Nadar S. Maxillary labium frenum in children of different age groups. Int J Current Res. 2017;9(5):50367-50369.

17. Upadhyay S, Ghimire N. Attachment of maxillary labial frenum in Nepalese children. Orthod J Nepal. 2012;2(1): 28-31.

18. Thosar N, Murarka P, Baliga S, Rathi N. Assessment of maxillary labial frenum morphology in primary, mixed and permanent dentitions in Wardha district. Eur J Gen Dent. 2017;6(1):14-17.

19. Melink S, Vagner MV, Hocevar-Boltezar I, Ovsenikd M. Posterior crossbite in the deciduous dentition period, its relation with sucking habits, irregular orofacial functions, and otolaryngological findings. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2010;138(1):32-40.

20. Nihi VSC, Maciel SM, Jarrus ME, Nihi FM, de Salles CLF, Pascotto RC, Fujimaki M. Pacifier-sucking habit duration and frequency on occlusal and myofunctional alterations in preschool children. Braz Oral Res. 2015;29(1):1-7.

21. Gois EG, Ribeiro Junior HC, Vale MP et al. Influence of nonnutritive sucking habits, breathing pattern and adenoid size on the development of malocclusion. Angle Orthod. 2008;78(4):647–654.

22. Moimaz SAS, Garbin AJI, Lima AMC, Lolli LF, Saliba O, Garbin CAS. Longitudinal study of habits leading to malocclusion development in childhood. BMC Oral Health. 2014;14(1):1-6.

23. Shah S, Allen P, Walker R, Rosen-Carole C, McKenna Benoit MK. Upper lip tie: anatomy, effect on breastfeeding, and correlation with ankyloglossia. Laryngoscope. 2020;00:1-6.

24. Nakhash R, Wasserteil N, Mimouni FB, Kasirer YM, Hammerman C, Bin-Nun A. Upper Lip Tie and Breastfeeding: A Systematic Review. Breastfeed Med. 2019;14(2):83-87.

Submission Turnaround Time

Top