Download PDF
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Eur J Dent 2012; 06(02): 123-132
DOI: 10.1055/s-0039-1698941
Original Article
Dental Investigation Society

Alveolar and symphysis regions of patients with skeletal class II division 1 anomalies with different vertical growth patterns

Elcin Esenlik
1   Department of Orthodontics Faculty of Dentistry, Suleyman Demirel University, Isparta
,
Fidan Alakus Sabuncuoglu
2   Erzurum Maresal Cakmak Military Hospital Dental Center, Department of Orthodontics, Erzurum
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
30 September 2019 (online)

Also available at
  PDF Download Permissions and Reprints

ABSTRACT

Objectives: The aim of this study was to investigate the alveolar and symphysis region properties in hyper-, hypo-, and normodivergent Class II division 1 anomalies

Methods: Pretreatment lateral cephalograms of 111 young adult female patients with skeletal Class II division 1 anomalies were compared to those of 54 Class I normal subjects (control group). Class II cases were divided into hyperdivergent (n = 58), hypodivergent (n = 19), and normodivergent groups (n = 34). The heights and widths of the symphysis and alveolus and the depth of maxillary palate were measured on the lateral cephalograms

Results: Mean symphysis width was wider in the hypodivergent Class II group than in the other groups, while mean symphysis height was similar among all groups. Maxillary palatal depth, upper incisor angle, upper and lower molar alveolar heights, and Id–Id′ width were also similar among groups

Conclusion: Symphysis width is the main factor in the differential diagnosis of Class II division 1 anomaly rather than symphysis height and hypodivergent Class II Division 1 anomaly is more suitable for mandibular incisors movements. (Eur J Dent 2012;6:123-132)

Key words

Dentoalveolar structure - symphysis region - class II division 1 anomaly - vertical pattern
 

  • References

  • 1 Moyers RE., Riolo ML, Guire KE, Wainright RL, Bookstein FL. Differential diagnosis of Class II malocclusion. Am J Orthod 1980;477-494.
  • 2 Henry RG. A classification of Class II, Division I malocclusion. Angle Orthod 1957;27:83-92.
  • 3 Craig CE. The skeletal patterns characteristics of Class I and Class II division I malocclusions in norma lateralis. Angle Orthod 1951;21:44-56.
  • 4 Schudy FF. The rotations of the mandible resulting from growth: it’s implications in orthodontic treatment. Angle Orthod 1965;35:36-53.
  • 5 Sassouni V. The Class II syndrome: Differential diagnosis and treatment. Angle Orthod 1970;40:334-341.
  • 6 Hellman M. Studies on the etiology of Angle’s class II malocclusion manifestations. Internat J Orthodontics 1922;8:129-159.
  • 7 Drelich RC. A cephalometric study of untreated Class II Division 1 malocclusion. Angle Orthod 1948;18:70-75.
  • 8 Bishara SE, Augspurger EF. The role of mandibuler plane angle inclination in orthodontic diagnosis. Angle Orthod 1975;45:273-281.
  • 9 Aki T, Nanda RS, Currier GF, Nanda SK. Assessment of the symphysis morphology as a predictor of the direction of mandibular growth. Am J Orthod 1994;106:60-69.
  • 10 Bjork A. Prediction of mandibular growth rotation. Am J Orthod 1969;55:585-599.
  • 11 Isaacson JR, Isaacson RJ, Speidel TM, Worms FW. Extreme variation in vertical facial growth and associated variation in skeletal and dental relations. Angle Orthod 1971;41:219-229.
  • 12 Buschang PH, Julien K, Sachdeva R, Demirjian A. Childhood and pubertal growth changes of the human symphysis. Angle Orthod 1992;62:203-210.
  • 13 Enlow DH, Harris DB. A study of the postnatal growth of the human mandible. Am J Orthod 1964;75:25-50.
  • 14 Skieller V, Bjork A, Linde-Hansen T. Prediction of mandibular growth rotation evaluated from a longitudinal sample. Am J Orthod 1984;86:359-370.
  • 15 Karlsen AT. Craniofacial growth differences between low and high MP-SN angle males: a longitudinal study. Angle Orthod 1995;65:341-350.
  • 16 Wehrbein H, Bauer W, Diedrich P. Mandibular incisors, alveolar bone, and symphysis after orthodontic treatment. A retrospective study. Am J Orthod 1996;110:239-246.
  • 17 Edwards JG. A study of the anterior portion of the palate as it relates to orthodontic therapy. Am J Orthod 1976;69:249-273.
  • 18 Kim YS, Cha JY, Yu HS, Hwang CJ. Comparison of mandibular anterior alveolar bone thickness in different facial skeletal types. Korean J Orthod 2010;40:314-324.
  • 19 Tweed CH. The Frankfort mandibular plane angle in orthodontic diagnosis, classification, treatment planning and prognosis. Am J Orthod 1946;32:175-230.
  • 20 Kim YK, Kyung HM, Kwon OW, Sung JH. Roentgenographic cephalometric study of angle´s class II, division 1 malocclusion in Korean children. Korean J Orthod 1989;19:67-78.
  • 21 Jeon LO, Lee KS. The cephalometric study of facial types in Class II division 1 malocclusion. Korean J Orthod 1989;19:201-218.
  • 22 Altemus LA. Horizontal and vertical dentofacial relationship in normal and Class II division 1 malocclusion in girls 11-15 years. Angle Orthod 1955;25:120-137.
  • 23 Gilmore WA. Morphology of the adult mandible in Class II Division 1 malocclusion and in excellent occlusion. Angle Orthod 1950;20:137-146.
  • 24 Blair ES. A cephalometric roentgenographic appraisal of the skeletal morphology of Class I, Class II Div 1 and Class II Div 2 (Angle) malocclusions. Angle Orthod 1954;24:106-119.
  • 25 Downs WB. Variation in Facial relationships: their significance in treatment and prognosis. Am J Orthod 1948;34:812-840.
  • 26 Margolis HI. The axial inclination of the mandibular incisors. Am J Orthod 1943;29:571.
  • 27 Opdebeek H, Bell WH, Eisenfeld J, Mishelevich D. Comparative study between the SFS and LFS rotation as a possible morphogenetic mechanism. Am J Orthod 1978;74:509-521.
  • 28 Fields HW, Proffit WR, Nixon WL, Phillips C, Stanek E. Facial pattern differences in long-faced children and adults. Am J Orthod 1984;85:217-223.
  • 29 Baumrind S, Bravo LA, Ben-Bassat Y, Curry S, Korn EL. Lower molar and incisor displacement associated with mandibular remodeling. Angle Orthod 1997;67:93-102.
  • 30 Janson GRP, Metaxas A, Woodside DG. Variation in maxillary and mandibular molar incisor vertical dimension in 12-year old subjects with excess, normal and short lower anterior face height. Am J Orthod 1994;106:409-418.
  • 31 Rosenstein SW. A longitudinal study of anteroposterior growth of the mandibular symphysis. Angle Orthod 1964;34:155-167.
  • 32 Garn SM, Lewis AB, Vicinus JH. The inheritance of symphyseal size during growth. 1963;33:222-231.
  • 33 Noh SH, Lee KS, Park YK. A cephalometric study on correlation between mandibular symphysis and craniofacial skeleton. Korean J Orthod 1997;27:119-127.
  • 34 Kim SJ, Son WS. A study on the relationship of the mandibular symphysis and anterior alveolar and skeletal morphology according to the rotational growth pattern of mandible in skeletal Class III malocclusion Korean J Orthod 1999;29:303-315.
  • 35 Tang N, Zhao ZH, Liao CH, Zhao MY. Morphological characteristics of mandibular symphysis in adult skeletal class II and class III malocclusions with abnormal vertical skeletal patterns. Hua Xi Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi 2010;28:395-398.
  • 36 Gracco A, Luca L, Bongiorno BC, Siciliani G. Computed tomography evaluation of mandibular incisor bony support in untreated patients. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 2010;138:179-187.
  • 37 Gündüz E, Rodriguez-Torres C, Gahleitner A, Heissenberger G, Bantleon HP. Bone regeneration by bodily tooth movement: dental computed tomography examination of a patient. Am J Orthod 2004;125:100-106.
  • 38 Frost HM. Walff’s law and bone structural adaptations to mechanical usage: an overview for clinicians. Angle Orthod 1994;3:175-188.
  • 39 Lupi JE, Handelman CS, Sadowsky C. Prevalence and severity of apical root resorption and alveolar bone loss in orthodontically treated adults. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1996;109:28-37.
  • 40 Sarıkaya S, Haydar B, Ciğer S, Arıyürek M. Changes in alveolar bone thickness due to retraction of anterior teeth. Am J Orthod 2002;122:15-26.
  • 41 Diedrich P. Problems and risks in the movement of the mandibular anterior teeth. Fortschr Kieferorthop 1995;56:148-156.
  • 42 Yamada C, Kitai N, Kakimoto N, Murakami S, Furukawa S, Takada K. Spatial relationships between the mandibular central incisor and associated alveolar bone in adults with mandibular prognathism. Angle Orthod 2007;77:766-772.
  • 43 Gracco A, Luca L, Cozzani M, Siciliani G. Assessment of palatal bone thickness in adults with cone beam computerised tomography. Aust Orthod J 2007:23;109-113.