Literature DB >> 7726463

Class II malocclusion: mandibular retrusion or maxillary protrusion?

R E Rosenblum1.   

Abstract

This study was undertaken to evaluate whether the majority of Class II skeletal patterns are mandibular retrusive or maxillary protrusive and also to compare four maxillary sagittal cephalometric indicators and four mandibular sagittal cephalometric indicators in a skeletal Class II sample. The Fishman SMA method was used to stratify the subjects into 11 maturity levels. Computerized cephalometric programs selected the subjects and compared the different indicators for each subject. The results indicate a wide diversity in the evaluation of maxillary protrusion and mandibular retrusion in these subjects. The Downs facial angle indicated that only 27.0% of the sample had mandibular retrusion. The angle NA-FH indicates that 56.3% of the sample had maxillary protrusion. These findings are in marked contrast to those evaluated by some of the other indicators. Preliminary data from this study was presented at a combined meeting of the Orthodontic Society of the Cote D'Azur and the North Atlantic Component of the E.H. Angle Society of Orthodontists, Nice, France, October 1990 and at the annual meeting of the North Atlantic Component of the E.H. Angle Society of Orthodontists, Philadelphia, April 1991.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1995        PMID: 7726463     DOI: 10.1043/0003-3219(1995)065<0049:CIMMRO>2.0.CO;2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Angle Orthod        ISSN: 0003-3219            Impact factor:   2.079


  8 in total

1.  Extraction therapy in patients with Class II/2 malocclusion.

Authors:  A Stellzig; E K Basdra; C Kube; G Komposch
Journal:  J Orofac Orthop       Date:  1999       Impact factor: 1.938

2.  Cephalometric characteristics of Class II division 1 malocclusion in a Saudi population living in the western region.

Authors:  Ali H Hassan
Journal:  Saudi Dent J       Date:  2010-11-02

3.  Short-term dentoskeletal changes following Class II treatment using a fixed functional appliance: the Austro Repositioner : A pilot study.

Authors:  M Dolores Austro; Encarnación González; M Angustias Peñalver; Domingo Pérez; José Antonio Alarcón
Journal:  J Orofac Orthop       Date:  2018-04-16       Impact factor: 1.938

4.  Re: Mandibular growth comparisons of Class I and Class II division 1 skeletofacial patterns by Helder B. Jacob, Peter H. Buschang. The Angle Orthod. 2014;84:755-761.

Authors:  Soumya Narayani Thirumoorthy
Journal:  Angle Orthod       Date:  2015-05       Impact factor: 2.079

5.  Pathognomonic features of Angle's Class II division 2 malocclusion: A comparative cephalometric and arch width study.

Authors:  Singamsetty E R V Prasad; Ravikishore Reddy Indukuri; Rupesh Singh; Anitha Nooney; Firoz Babu Palagiri; Veera Narayana
Journal:  J Int Soc Prev Community Dent       Date:  2014-12

6.  Diagnostic features of Angle's Class II div 2 malocclusion.

Authors:  Kiran Kumar Dodda; Singamsetty E R V Prasad; Ravi Krishna Kanuru; Siddhartha Nalluri; Radhika Mittapalli
Journal:  J Int Soc Prev Community Dent       Date:  2015 Nov-Dec

7.  Morphometric analysis of sella turcica in growing patients: an observational study on shape and dimensions in different sagittal craniofacial patterns.

Authors:  Michele Tepedino; Michele Laurenziello; Laura Guida; Graziano Montaruli; Giuseppe Troiano; Claudio Chimenti; Marco Colonna; Domenico Ciavarella
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2019-12-17       Impact factor: 4.379

8.  Morphological features of Class I, II and III malocclusions of Saudi adolescents.

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

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.