Relationship between vertical facial morphology and dental arch measurements in class II malocclusion: a retrospective study.
Arch dimension
Class II malocclusion
Vertical morphology
Journal
PeerJ
ISSN: 2167-8359
Titre abrégé: PeerJ
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101603425
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2023
2023
Historique:
received:
30
03
2023
accepted:
13
08
2023
medline:
12
9
2023
pubmed:
11
9
2023
entrez:
11
9
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
To evaluate the relationship between dental arch measurements and the vertical facial pattern determined in skeletal Class II untreated patients. Lateral cephalograms and plaster models were obtained from 124 untreated female adults (average age: 17.6 ± 3.8 years). Class I (CI), Class II Division 1 (CII/1) and Class II Division 2 (CII/2) malocclusions were divided into three subgroups according to their vertical morphology as hypodivergent, normodivergent and hyperdivergent. The multivariate variance analysis (MANOVA) method was used in the comparison of measurement values according to vertical and sagittal morphology. The relationship between both A point-Nasion-B point (ANB) and Frankfurt-mandibular plane (FMA) angles and dental arch measurements was examined by Pearson correlation analysis. The significance level was received as While vertical morphology has a statistically significant effect on mandibular arch length, sagittal morphology affects maxillary arch depth. The parameters influenced by both morphologies are maxillary and mandibular arch length, as well as maxillary intermolar width. The mandibular arch length was significantly shorter in hyperdivergent-CII-2 malocclusion (50.5 ± 7.4 mm). Larger values were obtained in both mandibular arch length and maxillary arch depth measurements in CII-1 malocclusion compared to CII-2 malocclusion. The maxillary intermolar width was significantly shorter in hypodivergent-CII-1 malocclusion (46.8 ± 3.4 mm), while it was higher in hypodivergent-CI malocclusion (51.1 ± 3.4 mm). The maxillary arch length was the lowest in hyperdivergent-CI malocclusion (63.1 ± 13.3 mm) and the highest in hypodivergent-CI malocclusion (72.8 ± 7.6 mm). Additionally, a positive but weak correlation was found between ANB and FMA angles. Dental arch measurements have been found to be affected by both vertical facial morphology and skeletal sagittal relationship. A positive correlation was found between ANB and FMA angles.
Sections du résumé
Background
To evaluate the relationship between dental arch measurements and the vertical facial pattern determined in skeletal Class II untreated patients.
Methods
Lateral cephalograms and plaster models were obtained from 124 untreated female adults (average age: 17.6 ± 3.8 years). Class I (CI), Class II Division 1 (CII/1) and Class II Division 2 (CII/2) malocclusions were divided into three subgroups according to their vertical morphology as hypodivergent, normodivergent and hyperdivergent. The multivariate variance analysis (MANOVA) method was used in the comparison of measurement values according to vertical and sagittal morphology. The relationship between both A point-Nasion-B point (ANB) and Frankfurt-mandibular plane (FMA) angles and dental arch measurements was examined by Pearson correlation analysis. The significance level was received as
Results
While vertical morphology has a statistically significant effect on mandibular arch length, sagittal morphology affects maxillary arch depth. The parameters influenced by both morphologies are maxillary and mandibular arch length, as well as maxillary intermolar width. The mandibular arch length was significantly shorter in hyperdivergent-CII-2 malocclusion (50.5 ± 7.4 mm). Larger values were obtained in both mandibular arch length and maxillary arch depth measurements in CII-1 malocclusion compared to CII-2 malocclusion. The maxillary intermolar width was significantly shorter in hypodivergent-CII-1 malocclusion (46.8 ± 3.4 mm), while it was higher in hypodivergent-CI malocclusion (51.1 ± 3.4 mm). The maxillary arch length was the lowest in hyperdivergent-CI malocclusion (63.1 ± 13.3 mm) and the highest in hypodivergent-CI malocclusion (72.8 ± 7.6 mm). Additionally, a positive but weak correlation was found between ANB and FMA angles.
Conclusion
Dental arch measurements have been found to be affected by both vertical facial morphology and skeletal sagittal relationship. A positive correlation was found between ANB and FMA angles.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37692120
doi: 10.7717/peerj.16031
pii: 16031
pmc: PMC10487581
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e16031Informations de copyright
© 2023 Ocak et al.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Muge Aksu works in her private clinic. The other authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Références
Angle Orthod. 2004 Jun;74(3):356-60
pubmed: 15264647
Angle Orthod. 2006 May;76(3):459-65
pubmed: 16637727
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1997 Apr;111(4):401-9
pubmed: 9109585
Dental Press J Orthod. 2016 Jul-Aug;21(4):41-9
pubmed: 27653263
Int J Adult Orthodon Orthognath Surg. 1998;13(2):97-106
pubmed: 9743642
Orthod Craniofac Res. 2015 May;18(2):65-76
pubmed: 25677755
Aust Orthod J. 2000 Mar;16(1):16-22
pubmed: 11201956
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1995 May;107(5):518-30
pubmed: 7733061
Angle Orthod. 2002 Jun;72(3):251-7
pubmed: 12071609
Angle Orthod. 2010 Sep;80(5):919-24
pubmed: 20578864
Angle Orthod. 2003 Dec;73(6):674-85
pubmed: 14719732
Eur J Paediatr Dent. 2014 Jun;15(2):151-7
pubmed: 25102466
Eur J Orthod. 2008 Jun;30(3):288-94
pubmed: 18263889
Angle Orthod. 2013 Mar;83(2):246-52
pubmed: 23458279
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2002 Dec;122(6):608-13
pubmed: 12490871
Eur J Orthod. 1994 Feb;16(1):47-52
pubmed: 8181550
Angle Orthod. 2007 Sep;77(5):837-44
pubmed: 17685768
J Int Oral Health. 2013 Apr;5(2):28-34
pubmed: 24155588
Prog Orthod. 2013 Nov 07;14:43
pubmed: 24326093
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2003 Dec;124(6):670-8
pubmed: 14666080
Dental Press J Orthod. 2019 Sep 05;24(4):63-72
pubmed: 31508708
Angle Orthod. 1972 Apr;42(2):116-22
pubmed: 4502015
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2002 Dec;122(6):619-26
pubmed: 12490873
Angle Orthod. 2003 Jun;73(3):301-6
pubmed: 12828439
Prog Orthod. 2018 Sep 10;19(1):34
pubmed: 30198054
Angle Orthod. 1971 Jul;41(3):219-29
pubmed: 5283670
Angle Orthod. 2005 Nov;75(6):941-7
pubmed: 16448235
Am J Orthod. 1985 Aug;88(2):163-9
pubmed: 3861102