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: Morphologic quantification of the maxilla and the mandible with cone-beam computed tomography.
    Author: Deguchi T, Katashiba S, Inami T, Foong KW, Huak CY.
    Journal: Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2010 Feb; 137(2):218-22. PubMed ID: 20152678.
    Abstract:
    INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this pilot study was to use cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) to determine the volumes of the maxilla and the mandible in subjects with skeletal Class I, Class II, and Class III malocclusions. Hypothesis 1 was that the volume (size) of a skeletal Class II maxilla is larger than those of Class I and Class III. Hypothesis 2 was that the volume of a skeletal Class III mandible is larger than those of Class I and Class II. METHODS: Thirty women patients were classified into 3 groups according to their skeletal pattern: skeletal Class I (0 degrees < or =ANB <6 degrees ), Class II (ANB > or =6 degrees ) and Class III (ANB <0 degrees ). The volumes of the maxilla and the mandible were measured with CBCT. CB MercuRay (Hitachi Medico, Tokyo, Japan) and CB works software (CyberMed, Seoul, Korea) were used to process the images. RESULTS: There was a trend that skeletal Class III subjects might have significantly greater mandibular volume compared with Class II subjects (P = 0.089). The ratios of maxilla-to-mandible volumes between the skeletal Class II and Class III groups were significantly different (P = 0.005). Differences were observed in the ratios of maxillary and mandibular volumes across the 3 groups. CONCLUSIONS: Hypotheses 1 and 2 were rejected; there was no trend for Class III subjects to have larger mandibles (P = 0.089) compared with Class II subjects. The ratio of the maxilla and mandible volumes in skeletal Class III subjects was significantly larger (P = 0.005) compared with Class II subjects.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]