World Journal of Dentistry

Register      Login

VOLUME 2 , ISSUE 3 ( July-September, 2011 ) > List of Articles

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Cephalometric Norms for Indian Adults using Digital Posteroanterior Analysis

David Marianayagam, Ashima Vallathan

Citation Information : Marianayagam D, Vallathan A. Cephalometric Norms for Indian Adults using Digital Posteroanterior Analysis. World J Dent 2011; 2 (3):199-205.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10015-1083

Published Online: 00-09-2011

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2011; Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) Ltd.


Abstract

Introduction

Facial and radiographic records in orthodontics are based on the profile. Aim of this study is to establish norms from digital posteroanterior (PA) cephalograms for Indian adults.

Materials and methods

The subjects included 45 Indian men and 55 Indian women, mean age 25 to 30 years. Subjects had ideal occlusion and a well-balanced face. About 12 linear measurements were determined using digital radiograph.

Results

There was statistically significant difference between male and female samples. Comparison between the Indian men and women indicated larger measurements for men.

Conclusion

According to these results new PA clinical norms are presented to Indian orthodontists for diagnosis and planning.

Abbreviations

ANS—Anterior nasal spine, A3-B3—Upper and lower canine right side, 3A-3B—Upper and lower canine left side Me—Menton.


PDF Share
  1. International anthropometric study of facial morphology in various ethnic groups/races. J Craniofacial Surg 2005;16: 615-46.
  2. Variation in the facial relationship their significance in treatment and prognosis. American Journal of Orthodontic 1948;34:812-40.
  3. The frankfort mandibular incisal angle (FMIA) in orthodontic diagnosis treatment planning and prognosis. Angle orthodontist 1954;24:121-69.
  4. Transverse development of the jaws: Norms for the posteroanterior cephalometric analysis. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1997;112:519-22.
  5. A longitudinal cephalometric study of transverse and vertical craniofacial growth. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1993;104:471-83.
  6. The Downs analysis applied to three other ethnic groups. Angle Orthod 1951;21: 213-20.
  7. A determination of cephalometric norms for the Negro race. Am J Orthod 1968;54:670-82.
  8. Orthognathic surgery norms for American black patients. Am J Orthod 1985;87:119-34.
  9. Cephalometric norms for orthognathic surgery in black American adults. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1989;47:30-39.
  10. Mesh diagram analysis: Developing a norm for African Americans. Angle Orthod 1997;67:121-28.
  11. Gender and racial variations in cephalometric analysis. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1997;117:326-29.
  12. A comparison of cephalometric norms for the African Bantu and a caucasoid population. Eur J Orthod 1983;5:233-40.
  13. Selected cephalometric norms in Kikuyu children. Anglen Orthod 1989;59:139-44.
  14. The facial configuration in a sample of Chinese boys. Angle Orthod 1973;43:301-04.
  15. A comparative study of southern Chinese and British Caucasian cephalometric standards. Angle Orthod 1989;59:131-38.
  16. Steiner cephalometric norms for Japanese and Japanese-Americans. Am J Orthod 1978;73:321-27.
  17. Cephalometric and visual norms for a Japanese population. Am J Orthod 1981;80:48-60.
  18. Craniofacial structure of Japanese and European-American adults with normal occlusions and well-balanced faces. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1996;110:431-38.
  19. Cephalometric norms in Japanese adults. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1998;56: 129-34.
  20. Cephalometric study of the dentofacial complex of north Indians. Angle Orthod 1969;39:22-28.
  21. Adult cephalometric norms for Saudi Arabians with a comparison of values for Saudi and North American Caucasians. Br J Orthod 1987;14:273-79.
  22. Mesh diagram analysis: Developing a norm for Puerto Rican Americans. Angle Orthod 1997;67:381-88.
  23. Posteroanterior cephalometric norms in Turkish adults. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2005;127:324-32.
  24. Orthodontic cephalometry. Saint Louis: Mosby Wolf 1997.
  25. New posteroanterior cephalometric norms: A comparison with craniofacial measures of children treated with palatal expansion. Angle Orthod 2001;71:285-92.
  26. A frontal asymmetry analysis. J Clin Orthod 1987;21:448-65.
  27. A longitudinal cephalometric study of transverse and vertical craniofacial growth. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1993;104:471-83.
  28. Bolton standards of dentofacial development and growth. Saint Louis: Mosby 1975.
  29. Standards of human occlusal development. Craniofacial Growth Series. Ann Arbor: Center for Human Growth and Development University of Michigan 1976.
  30. A Poaterioantrior cephalometric study of bilateral facial asymmetry. JPFA June 2000;14:53-59.
  31. Craniofacial width dimensions. Angle Orthod 1970;40:141-47.
  32. Craniofacial anthropometric norms of Malaysian Indians. Indian J Dental Res 2009;20(3):313-19.
  33. Orthodontic diagnosis and planning: Their roles in preventive and rehabilitative dentistry (Volume 1). Denver: Rocky Mountain Data Systems 1982;15-47.
  34. Skeletal asymmetry in esthetically pleasing faces. Angle Orthodontist 1991;61:43-47.
  35. Three-dimensional analysis of maxillary and mandibular growth increments cleft palate. Craniofacial Journal May 2004;41(3).
  36. A new X-ray technique and its application to orthodontia. Angle orthod 1931;1:45-66.
  37. Three-dimentional X-ray stereometry from paired coplanar images: A progree report. Am J Dentofac Orthop 1983;84:292-12.
  38. Growth in bizygomatic face breadth during childhood. Growth 1954;18:111-34.
  39. The primary role of functional matrices in facial growth. Am J Orthod 1969;55:566-77.
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.