Cephalometric Comparison of Dentofacial Variables in Class I and Class II Jaw Bases: A Study for Different Growth Patterns
[Year:2022] [Month:Supplementary Issue 1] [Volume:13] [Number:S1] [Pages:5] [Pages No:S14 - S18]
Antegonial notch, Growth pattern, Interincisal angle, Intermolar angle, Lateral cephalogram, Lower anterior facial height, Malocclusion, Ramal height
DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10015-2135 |
Open Access |
Aim: To compare six dentofacial variables among different growth patterns in skeletal class I and class II jaw bases in a lateral cephalogram.
Materials and methods: The sample consisted of 120 lateral cephalograms of patients with ages ranging from 18 to 35 years. The sample was divided equally on the basis of ANB angle, Wits appraisal, and beta angle into skeletal class I (group I, n = 60), and class II jaw bases (group II, n = 60). Each group was then further divided into average (SN–MP 28–32°), horizontal (SN–MP <28°), and vertical growth patterns (SN–MP >32°). Hence, there were a total of six groups with 20 cephalograms each. The six parameters: interincisal angle (IIA), intermolar angle (IMA), inclination of symphysis (ISY), antegonial notch depth (AGN), lower anterior facial height (LAFH), and ramus height (RH) were traced, and a comparison was made among different growth patterns in class I and class II jaw bases. Statistical analysis was done using one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) followed by post hoc Bonferroni test.
Results: Ramus height (RH) and AGN show an insignificant difference between class I and class II jaw bases irrespective of growth pattern. LAFH is significantly increased for class II jaw bases, and ISY is more for class I jaw bases for normodivergent and hypodivergent patterns. IIA and IMA are significantly more for class I jaw bases for normodivergent and hypodivergent growth patterns, respectively.
Conclusion: There is a suggestive effect of anteroposterior jaw base relationship on the parameters considered in the study which were formerly considered to be influenced only by growth patterns.
Clinical significance: From a clinical perspective, in an individual seeking orthodontic treatment, the decision to extract, anchorage preparation, biomechanics applied, and period of retention are dependent on different growth patterns and the anteroposterior relationship of jaw bases which is shown to be influenced by the parameters considered in this study.