These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: [Cephalometric comparisons of the craniofacial characteristics of Class II 1 malocclusions with different vertical types in adolescences].
    Author: Ye Q, Zhao ZH, Zhao MY.
    Journal: Shanghai Kou Qiang Yi Xue; 2006 Aug; 15(4):370-4. PubMed ID: 16955160.
    Abstract:
    PURPOSE: To compare the craniofacial characteristics in Class II(1) malocclusions with different vertical types in adolescence. METHODS: The sample, including 60 males and 60 females, was divided into three groups equally based on their FMA degrees (high-angle group, average-angle group, low-angle group and normal occlusion group). Cephalograms were traced for all the subjects. Data were obtained to perform analysis of variance and LSD multiple range test. RESULTS: 1. The vertical growth of the anterior part of maxilla was greater than the posterior part in the three groups with Class II(1) malocclusion. The vertical dimension of the composite ramus-cranial floor was deficient relative to that of anterior maxilla in the high-angle and average-angle groups, the mandible rotated backward, especially in the high-angle group. In the low-angle group, the vertical dimension of the composite ramus-cranial floor grew excessively relative to that of posterior maxilla. The palatal plane and mandible plane rotated forward and upward. 2. The dentoalveolar characteristics of Class II(1) malocclusion group showed that: U6 tipped distally, the dentoalveolar height of L6 decreased, the functional occlusal plane (FOP) of average-angle group deviated away from the neutral occlusal axis (NOA), and rotated downward. In the high- angle group, the FOP deviated away from the NOA severely. The vertical dentoalveolar heights of U6 were normal. In the low-angle group, the vertical dentoalveolar heights of U6, the dentoalveolar height of L6 decreased, the angle of FOP between NOA showed no significantly difference from normal-occlusion group. CONCLUSION: There were different craniofacial vertical characteristics of Class II(1) malocclusion with different vertical types in adolescences. Different methods should be used to control the vertical dimensions in different types.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]