title: Canine location in different maxillomandibular relationships in Egyptians and Saudis.
abstract: The standards or proportions commonly used as guides for the selection of maxillary anterior teeth for a removable prosthesis have been developed mainly on Caucasian populations with normal ridge relationships.
  
  
  OBJECTIVE
  This study was conducted to determine the canine position in relation to commissures in different maxillomandibular relationships among Egyptian and Saudi populations.
  
  
  METHODS
  Two hundred subjects participated in this study, 100 from each population. The location of the corners of the mouth for each subject was marked on the buccal surface of a screen previously constructed on the maxillary cast and transferred to the casts. The distances between the corners of the mouth and the canines' distal aspect were measured on the casts. The measurements were subdivided according to their relation to the commissures: at commissures, medial to commissures, or distal to commissures. The data were then statistically analyzed.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Coincidence between the canine distal aspects and commissures was recorded only within 8% of both Egyptian and Saudi populations. Additionally, within the Egyptian population, coincidence was recorded only at Class-I ridge relationship.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Commissures are not a reliable landmark for determination of the distal aspect of the canine distal aspects of both Egyptian and Saudi populations.
authors: Department of Prosthetic Dental Sciences, College of Dentistry, King Saud University, Saudi Arabia and Tanta University, Egypt ; Prosthodontic Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Tanta University, Egypt.
authors: Safa'a
authors: S
authors: Asal
authors: Sharifa A
authors: SA
authors: Al-Shehri
authors: Hoda M A
authors: HM
authors: Rashad
keywords: Canine relationship; Egyptian; Maxillomandibular; Saudi
references: Int J Prosthodont. 2005 Nov-Dec;18(6):513-5
references: 16335171
references: J Esthet Restor Dent. 2006;18(4):196-205; discussion 205
references: 16911420
references: J Prosthet Dent. 2001 Dec;86(6):608-12
references: 11753312
references: J Prosthodont. 2006 Nov-Dec;15(6):353-8
references: 17096807
references: Am J Orthod. 1972 Jan;61(1):29-37
references: 4500185
references: Int J Prosthodont. 2002 May-Jun;15(3):283-8
references: 12066492
references: J Prosthet Dent. 1967 Oct;18(4):292-303
references: 5233348
references: J Prosthet Dent. 1982 Jul;48(1):15-22
references: 6955504
references: Quintessence Int. 2005 Sep;36(8):603-7
references: 16161462
references: Int J Prosthodont. 1994 Sep-Oct;7(5):410-7
references: 7802908
references: J Prosthet Dent. 1986 Feb;55(2):219-21
references: 3514860
references: J Prosthet Dent. 2005 Dec;94(6):530-8
references: 16316799
references: J Prosthet Dent. 1974 Jul;32(1):107-11
references: 4525513
references: J Clin Periodontol. 1999 Mar;26(3):153-7
references: 10100040
references: J Clin Orthod. 2002 Jun;36(6):339-47
references: 12101544
references: J Prosthet Dent. 2002 Jul;88(1):16-20
references: 12239474
references: J Prosthet Dent. 1991 Feb;65(2):250-4
references: 2051360
references: Am J Orthod. 1974 Nov;66(5):479-86
references: 4621246
references: Angle Orthod. 2003 Jun;73(3):301-6
references: 12828439
references: Forensic Sci Int. 2003 Nov 26;137(2-3):160-4
references: 14609652