INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this study was to describe the craniofacial growth changes of subjects with Class II malocclusion associated with maxillary skeletal protrusion at the circumpubertal growth period. METHODS: The records of 25 untreated subjects with normal Class I occlusion and 25 untreated Class II subjects (14 boys and 11 girls in each group) were selected from the longitudinal records of the University of Michigan Growth Study. All Class II subjects had maxillary protrusion. Measurements were made on lateral and posteroanterior cephalograms and on dental casts at 2 times. The first observation (T1) was during the prepubertal growth phase (vertebral stages CS1 to CS3). The second observation (T2) was during the postpubertal phase of growth (vertebral stages CS4 to CS6). The following comparisons were made: Class I vs Class II at T1, Class I vs Class II at T2, and growth changes in Class I vs Class II. RESULTS: No dentofacial feature studied showed any statistically significant difference when comparing the growth changes between the Class II and the Class I groups. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that dentofacial features of Class II malocclusion associated with maxillary skeletal protrusion are maintained during the circumpubertal period, and that growth changes in this type of Class II disharmony are similar to those in subjects with normal occlusion.
INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this study was to describe the craniofacial growth changes of subjects with Class II malocclusion associated with maxillary skeletal protrusion at the circumpubertal growth period. METHODS: The records of 25 untreated subjects with normal Class I occlusion and 25 untreated Class II subjects (14 boys and 11 girls in each group) were selected from the longitudinal records of the University of Michigan Growth Study. All Class II subjects had maxillary protrusion. Measurements were made on lateral and posteroanterior cephalograms and on dental casts at 2 times. The first observation (T1) was during the prepubertal growth phase (vertebral stages CS1 to CS3). The second observation (T2) was during the postpubertal phase of growth (vertebral stages CS4 to CS6). The following comparisons were made: Class I vs Class II at T1, Class I vs Class II at T2, and growth changes in Class I vs Class II. RESULTS: No dentofacial feature studied showed any statistically significant difference when comparing the growth changes between the Class II and the Class I groups. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that dentofacial features of Class II malocclusion associated with maxillary skeletal protrusion are maintained during the circumpubertal period, and that growth changes in this type of Class II disharmony are similar to those in subjects with normal occlusion.
Authors: Lina M Moreno Uribe; Sara C Howe; Colleen Kummet; Kaci C Vela; Deborah V Dawson; Thomas E Southard Journal: Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop Date: 2014-03 Impact factor: 2.650
Authors: Khalid H Zawawi; Fahad F Alsulaimani; Ayman A Al-Dharrab; Ahmed R Afify; Mohammad S Al-Zahrani; Hosam A Baeshen Journal: Saudi J Biol Sci Date: 2021-03-18 Impact factor: 4.219