Premium
Quantitative analysis of the maxilla and the mandible in hyper‐ and hypodivergent skeletal class II pattern
Author(s) -
Nair R,
Deguchi T Sr,
Li X,
Katashiba S,
Chan YH
Publication year - 2009
Publication title -
orthodontics and craniofacial research
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.664
H-Index - 55
eISSN - 1601-6343
pISSN - 1601-6335
DOI - 10.1111/j.1601-6343.2008.01431.x
Subject(s) - mandible (arthropod mouthpart) , cone beam computed tomography , medicine , maxilla , significant difference , dentistry , malocclusion , orthodontics , computed tomography , radiology , genus , botany , biology
Structured Abstract Authors – Nair R, Deguchi T Sr., Li X, Katashiba S, Chan YH Objectives – To examine the volumetric (size) difference in the maxilla and the mandible of hyper‐ and hypodivergent skeletal patterns in Angle class II malocclusion. Design – Descriptive retrospective study. The hypothesis is that a hypodivergent mandible has a larger size than a hyperdivergent mandible. Setting and Sample Population – Using cone‐beam computed tomography, 20 subjects with Angle class II malocclusion were classified into two groups; 10 of 20 subjects formed a hyperdivergent group while the rest formed a hypodivergent group. Material and methods – Cone‐beam computed tomography images were obtained and processed and 3D volume data was measured by one clinician. Dahlberg’s technique was used to assess the measurement error and significant difference was set at p < 0.05. Results – No significant differences were found between the volumes of the maxilla and mandible in both groups. Differences were observed in the ratio of mandibular/maxillary volumes. The hypodivergent group had a significantly larger ( p = 0.014) ratio than the hyperdivergent group. Conclusions – Maxillary and mandibular volumes differ between hyper‐ and hypodivergent skeletal patterns.