Literature DB >> 9637570

Mandibular changes in persons with untreated and treated Class II division 1 malocclusion.

S E Bishara1.   

Abstract

The growth potential of individuals with Class II malocclusions is of interest to the practicing orthodontist because such malocclusions constitute a significant percentage of cases. The purpose of this study was to evaluate on cross-sectional and longitudinal bases the changes in mandibular length and relationship and maxillary-mandibular relationships in untreated Class II subjects from deciduous to permanent dentition and also to evaluate the effects of orthodontic treatment, with and without the extraction of first premolars, on these relationships. Class II samples were compared with matched normal, untreated individuals. The Class II division 1 (Class II/1) untreated sample comprised 30 subjects, 15 males and 15 females. Each subject had a complete set of data at three stages of dental development-namely, Stage I, after the completion of eruption of the deciduous dentition; Stage II, at the time when the permanent first molars and most of the incisors have erupted (i.e., in mixed dentition); and Stage III, at the completion of eruption of the permanent dentition, excluding third molars. The Class II treated sample comprised 44 subjects (21 males, 23 females) treated with four first-premolar extractions and 47 subjects (20 males, 27 females) treated without extraction. Treatment was accomplished with the use of an edgewise appliance, appropriate extraoral traction, and Class II elastics. The extraction decision was based mainly on the presence of crowding and profile consideration. Records on 35 normal subjects (20 males, 15 females) were available from the Iowa Longitudinal Facial Growth Study. Cephalograms for the normal individuals were matched to the corresponding ages of the Class II cases. With regard to these findings, few consistent differences were noted between the untreated Class II/1 and normal subjects on cross-sectional comparisons. The differences in mandibular length and position were more evident in the early stages of development than at later stages. Longitudinal comparisons of growth profiles indicated that the growth trends were essentially similar between the untreated Class II/1 and normal subjects in the various parameters compared. The comparisons of growth magnitude indicated the presence of greater skeletal facial convexity in the untreated Class II/1 subjects, accompanied by a tendency for a more retruded mandible. Initial comparisons between the Class II/1 treated groups and normal subjects indicated that the Class II/1 malocclusions were associated with a larger overjet, deeper overbite, and greater ANB angle. After a 5-year treatment and observation period, an overall "normalization" in the mandibular and maxillary-mandibular skeletal relationships was noted in the treated Class II/1 subjects in both the extraction and the nonextraction groups compared with normal subjects. The changes were more pronounced in the extraction group.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9637570     DOI: 10.1016/s0889-5406(98)70227-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop        ISSN: 0889-5406            Impact factor:   2.650


  13 in total

1.  The article by Kochel et al. gives rise to certain reservations.

Authors:  Ulrich Fellner
Journal:  J Orofac Orthop       Date:  2013-01       Impact factor: 1.938

2.  Total maxillary arch distalization by using headgear in an adult patient.

Authors:  Chenshuang Li; Luca Sfogliano; Wenlu Jiang; Haofu Lee; Zhong Zheng; Chun-Hsi Chung; John Jones
Journal:  Angle Orthod       Date:  2021-03-01       Impact factor: 2.079

3.  Orthopedic correction of growing hyperdivergent, retrognathic patients with miniscrew implants.

Authors:  Peter H Buschang; Roberto Carrillo; P Emile Rossouw
Journal:  J Oral Maxillofac Surg       Date:  2011-01-13       Impact factor: 1.895

4.  Overjet correction and space closure mechanisms for Class II treatment by extracting the maxillary first molars.

Authors:  Johan W Booij; Juliane Goeke; Ewald M Bronkhorst; Hans Pancherz; Sabine Ruf; Christos Katsaros
Journal:  J Orofac Orthop       Date:  2011-07       Impact factor: 1.938

5.  Class II treatment by extraction of maxillary first molars or Herbst appliance: dentoskeletal and soft tissue effects in comparison.

Authors:  Johan Willem Booij; Juliane Goeke; Ewald Maria Bronkhorst; Christos Katsaros; Sabine Ruf
Journal:  J Orofac Orthop       Date:  2013-01-10       Impact factor: 1.938

6.  Craniofacial growth and morphology among intersecting clinical categories.

Authors:  Ryan P Knigge; Anna M Hardin; Kevin M Middleton; Kieran P McNulty; Hee Soo Oh; Manish Valiathan; Dana L Duren; Richard J Sherwood
Journal:  Anat Rec (Hoboken)       Date:  2022-02-11       Impact factor: 2.227

Review 7.  One Phase versus Two Phase Treatment in Mixed Dentition: A Critical Review.

Authors:  M Suresh; Akurathi Ratnaditya; Vivekanand S Kattimani; Shameem Karpe
Journal:  J Int Oral Health       Date:  2015-08

8.  Mandibular growth comparisons of Class I and Class II division 1 skeletofacial patterns.

Authors:  Helder B Jacob; Peter H Buschang
Journal:  Angle Orthod       Date:  2014-02-13       Impact factor: 2.079

9.  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

10.  Changes of occlusal plane inclination after orthodontic treatment in different dentoskeletal frames.

Authors:  Jin-le Li; Chung Kau; Min Wang
Journal:  Prog Orthod       Date:  2014-06-25       Impact factor: 2.750

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.