Article

Linear evaluation of the development of sagittal jaw relationship

History of Science Department, University of Aarhus, Aarhus, Denmark
American Journal of Orthodontics 10/1985; 88(3):235-41. DOI: 10.1016/S0002-9416(85)90218-0
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT

In cephalometrics both angular and linear variables have been proposed in the analysis of sagittal jaw relationship and jaw position. Angular measurements can be erroneous as a result of changes in facial height, jaw inclination, and total jaw prognathism; linear variables can be affected by the inclination of the reference line. In the present article, a method of geometric correction of linear analysis of sagittal jaw relationship and jaw prognathism (based on a standardized occlusal plane) is described. The method is applied to radiographic material (from King's College Hospital, London) of 33 children who, at the age of 19, exhibited Class I occlusal patterns. While uncorrected linear measurement suggested stability of the sagittal jaw relationship from the age of 11 to 19 years, the geometrically corrected value demonstrated a marked reduction in sagittal jaw relationship. The method is developed further to demonstrate the increase in jaw prognathism measured as lined parameters with origin at point sella, the results illustrating again the advisability of correction of geometric errors.

0 Followers
 · 
30 Reads
  • Source
    • "Of those Downs,[4] Steiner,[5] Tweed,[67] Ricketts[89] and Jacobson[1011] probably have gained the widest acceptance. The analyses of Coben,[12] Wylie,[13] Sassouni,[1415] Enlow[16] and associates Bimler,[17] Edward Beatty's[18] AXD angle, Rocco J. Di Paolo,[19] Stephen Williams,[20] Sang D Yang[21] are perhaps less widely used, but they are nevertheless well known. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: In orthodontic diagnosis and treatment planning, assessment of anteroposterior discrepancy is of importance to the orthodontist. Both angular and linear measurements have been incorporated into various cephalometric analyses to help the clinician diagnose anteroposterior discrepancies and establish the most appropriate treatment plan. Hence the present study is designed to establish the norms of Beta angle to assess the sagittal discrepancy for Nellore district population. The sample was screened from the old records of the Orthodontic department of Narayana Dental College and Hospital. One hundred and fifty pretreatment cephalometric radiographs (50 each of Class I, II, and III) were subdivided based on ANB, Wits appraisal, and Beta angle into skeletal Class I, II, III. The same cephalograms were again classified into skeletal Class I, II, and III based purely on Beta angle. Each group was again divided into 2 subgroups consisting of 25 male and 25 female subjects with a mean age limit between 15 and 45 years old. The Newman-keuls post hoc test and ANOVA showed that the 3 groups were significantly different (P ≤ 0.001). The Newman-keuls post hoc test also found the groups to be significantly different. There was statistically significant difference for, the mean values and the standard deviation for Beta angle within the three skeletal patterns (Class I, Class II and Class III skeletal patterns). There was no statistically significant difference among the mean values of beta angle between Nellore district population and Caucasian norms and between male and female sex groups.
    Full-text · Article · Mar 2013
  • Source
    • "Since the palatal plane was found to be relatively stable in longitudinal cephalometric studies and because it is more easily located compared with the occlusal plane,Williams et al. (1985)proposed projecting points A and B onto a constructed occlusal plane, angled 8 degrees to the palatal plane. The reasons listed for selecting these reference planes include their superior anatomic stability over time, both in absolute terms (Williams et al. , 1985), as relative to the jaws ( Hall-Scott, 1994 ; i.e. the reference plane follows the rotation of the jaws), or that the anatomic points defi ning the reference planes are more easily discernible (Holdaway, 1983 ;McNamara, 1984 ;Williams et al. , 1985 ;Chang, 1987 ;Hall-Scott, 1994 ;Ferrazzini, 1976;Yang and Suhr, 1995). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The aim of this study was to investigate a method which minimizes the effects of geometric distortion on various cephalometric measurements used to determine sagittal discrepancy, such as ANB angle, Wits appraisal, AB plane angle, projections on the palatal plane, Frankfort horizontal (FH) plane, the mandibulomaxillary bisector, and the SN line, in an attempt to optimize the correlation between them. This was accomplished by superimposing the Bolton 12-year male-female averaged template on a patient's tracing using Procrustes analysis and performing measurements while exchanging the patient's reference landmarks/planes (point N, the mandibulomaxillary bisector, FH plane, occlusal plane, palatal plane, and SN line) with those of the template. The normalized measurements were then compared with their classic counterparts using correlation coefficients. The above cephalometric analyses, classic and normalized, were applied to 71 patients [26 males: mean age 13.1 years, standard deviation (SD) 1.1 years and 45 females: mean age of 14.6 years, SD 8.2 years]. Spearman's rank correlation coefficient was calculated between the classic measurements and their normalized counterparts, resulting in a consistent increase in the correlation between the normalized measurements in comparison with the classic ones. This increase varied in absolute value from 0.052 to 0.405. All normalized measurements were highly correlated (P > 0.742, absolute value). Although correlation calculations do not represent a true measure of diagnostic performance, it is hoped that improving their correspondence heightens the possibility of the different tests agreeing on the patient's sagittal discrepancy, decreasing the possibility of differing, or even totally opposing diagnostic outcomes resulting from their application to (clear-cut) Class I, II, and III patients.
    Preview · Article · Aug 2009 · The European Journal of Orthodontics

  • No preview · Article ·
Show more