Direct Versus Indirect Measurement of Height of The Interproximal Contact Area in Maxillary Anterior Teeth

Authors

  • Madiha Shahbaz Department of Prosthodontics, Armed Forces Institute of Dentistry Rawalpindi/National University of Medical Sciences (NUMS) Pakistan
  • Col Saad Khan Department of Prosthodontics, Armed Forces Institute of Dentistry Rawalpindi/National University of Medical Sciences (NUMS) Pakistan
  • Asifa Abbas Department of Prosthodontics, Armed Forces Institute of Dentistry Rawalpindi/National University of Medical Sciences (NUMS) Pakistan
  • Ayesha Iftikhar Department of Prosthodontics, Armed Forces Institute of Dentistry Rawalpindi/National University of Medical Sciences (NUMS) Pakistan
  • Surriya Sherazi Department of Prosthodontics, Armed Forces Institute of Dentistry Rawalpindi/National University of Medical Sciences (NUMS) Pakistan
  • Seema Khattak Department of Prosthodontics, Armed Forces Institute of Dentistry Rawalpindi/National University of Medical Sciences (NUMS) Pakistan

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.51253/pafmj.v76iSUPPL-6.13822

Keywords:

Anterior Teeth, Dental Casts, Interproximal Contact Area, Intraoral Measurement

Abstract

Objective: To compare interproximal contact area (ICA) height measurements obtained intraorally with those recorded on dental casts, in order to assess their accuracy and reliability.

Study Design: Cross-sectional comparative study.

Place and Duration of the Study: Department of Prosthodontics, Armed Forces Institute of Dentistry Rawalpindi, Pakistan from Dec 2024 to May 2025.

Methodology: A total of 90 participants with intact maxillary anterior teeth were included. ICA heights were measured intraorally using a digital caliper and compared with corresponding measurements taken on stone casts derived from alginate impressions. ICA was recorded between central incisors (CI–CI), central and lateral incisors (CI–LI), lateral incisors and canines (LI–C), and canines and first premolars (C–FP). Data was analyzed using paired t-tests, with p<0.05 considered statistically significant.

Results: Mean ICA heights were consistently greater on dental casts than intraorally. The highest values were noted between central incisors (4.79 ± 0.63 mm on casts vs. 4.42 ± 0.90 mm intraorally; p = 0.003). Similar significant discrepancies were found at CI–LI, LI–C, and C–FP sites (all p<0.001). Intraorally, the greatest ICA was at the CI–CI site, whereas the lowest was between the canine and first premolar on the right side.

Conclusion: Dental casts tend to overestimate ICA height compared to intraoral measurements. Intraoral assessments should be prioritized for accurate clinical evaluation.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

1. Zhang Y, Hong G, Zhang Y, Sasaki K, Wu H. Minimally invasive procedures for deficient interdental papillae: A review. J Esthet Restor Dent 2020; 32(5): 463-471.https://doi:10.1111/jerd.12608

2. Khlef HN, Hajeer MY. Is it possible to achieve favorable accelerated dental changes with no periodontal complications when retracting upper anterior teeth assisted by flapless corticotomy compared to traditional corticotomy? A two-arm randomized controlled trial. Sci World J 2022; 2022: 4261248. https://doi:10.1155/2022/4261248

3. Stappert CF, Tarnow DP, Tan JH, Chu SJ. Proximal contact areas of the maxillary anterior dentition. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2010; 30(5): 471-477.

4. Blandy MC. Assessment of the accuracy of interproximal tooth reduction using three-dimensional digital models. Townsville: James Cook University; 2015.

5. Khatri MP, Kishore S, Hemmanur S. Aesthetic smile designing [Internet]. London: IntechOpen; 2023. https://doi:10.5772/intechopen.86424

6. Sghaireen MG, Al-Zarea BK, Al-Shorman HM, Al-Omiri MK. Clinical measurement of the height of the interproximal contact area in maxillary anterior teeth. Int J Health Sci 2013; 7(3): 325-330. https://doi:10.12816/0006061

7. Kolte AP, Kolte RA, Bawankar P. Proximal contact areas of maxillary anterior teeth and their influence on interdental papilla. Saudi Dent J 2018; 30(4): 324-329. https://doi:10.1016/j.sdentj.2018.05.007

8. Kantrong N, Traiveat K, Wongkhantee S. Natural upper anterior teeth display an increasing proportion in mesio-distal direction. J Clin Exp Dent 2019; 11(10): e890-e897. https://doi:10.4317/jced.56206

9. Sarig R, Vardimon AD, Sussan C, Benny L, Sarne O, Hershkovitz I, et al. Pattern of maxillary and mandibular proximal enamel thickness at the contact area of the permanent dentition from first molar to first molar. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2015; 147(4): 435-444.

https://doi:10.1016/j.ajodo.2014.11.026

10. Behzadi S, Mohammadibassir M, Hamze F, Rezvani MB. Evaluating the proximal contact tightness in direct or in-direct restoration of endodontically treated teeth: Randomized clinical trial. J Clin Exp Dent 2024; 16(8): e931-e939.

https://doi:10.4317/jced.61558

11. Varthis S, Tarnow DP, Randi A. Interproximal open contacts between implant restorations and adjacent teeth: prevalence, causes, possible solutions. J Prosthodont 2018; 28(2): e806-e810.

https://doi:10.1111/jopr.12980

12. Esmaeli F, Shirmohammadi A, Faramarzie M, Abolfazli N, Rasouli H, Fallahi S. Determination of vertical interproximal bone loss topography: correlation between indirect digital radiographic measurement and clinical measurement. Iran J Radiol 2012; 9(2): 83-87.

https://doi:10.5812/iranjradiol.7732

13. Syed ZS, Khan UR, Butt SA, Fayyaz A, Ahmad MU, Memon AA. Clinical measurement of proximal contact areas of maxillary anterior dentition. J Popul Ther Clin Pharmacol 2024; 31(2): e4313.

https://doi.org/10.53555/jptcp.v31i2.4313

14. Khaireddine H, Mohamed T, Arij R, Faten K, Faten BA. Factors impacting the height of the interproximal papilla: A cross-sectional study. Clin Exp Dent Res 2023; 9(3): 449-454.

https://doi.org/10.1002/cre2.728

15. Kolte AP, Kolte RA, Purohit MJ, Bajaj VA. Proportions in papilla, crestal papilla, and proximal contact area in maxillary anterior teeth: A cross-sectional study. J Indian Soc Periodontol 2022; 26(5): 492-497.

https://doi.org/10.4103/jisp.jisp_251_21

16. Sheba M, Floriani F, Nimmo A, Ercoli C, Hosney S. Interproximal contact loss between implant restorations and adjacent natural teeth: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Prosthodont 2023; 33(4): 313-323.

https://doi.org/10.1111/jopr.13780

17. Alqahtani AS, Habib SR, Ali M, Alshahrani AS, Alotaibi NM, Alahaidib FA. Maxillary anterior teeth dimension and relative width proportion in a Saudi subpopulation. J Taibah Univ Med Sci 2021; 16(2): 209-216.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtumed.2020.12.009

18. Sghaireen MG, Albhiran HM, Alzoubi IA, Lynch E, Al-Omiri MK. Intraoral versus extraoral measurement of the height of the interproximal contact area in maxillary anterior teeth. Med Princ Pract 2015; 24(2): 136-141.

https://doi.org/10.1159/000369903

Downloads

Published

29-05-2026

Issue

Section

Original Articles

Categories

How to Cite

1.
Shahbaz M, Khan S, Abbas A, Iftikhar A, Sherazi S, Khattak S. Direct Versus Indirect Measurement of Height of The Interproximal Contact Area in Maxillary Anterior Teeth. Pak Armed Forces Med J [Internet]. 2026 May 29 [cited 2026 Jun. 27];76(SUPPL-6):S1003-S1008. Available from: https://pafmj.org/PAFMJ/article/view/13822