A relationship among dental crowding, maxillary and mandibular base lengths and naso-labial angle in untreated class I and class II subjects in mandi Gobindgarh population

Vishal Kumar Sharma

doi:10.53730/ijhs.v5nS1.5663

Authors

Vishal Kumar Sharma
vishaldentist@yahoo.co.in
Senior Lecturer, Department of Orthodontics & Dentofacial Orthopaedics, Desh Bhagat Dental College and Hospital, Desh Bhagat University Campus, Mandi Gobindgarh, Punjab, India

Keywords:

dental crowding, class I malocclusion, class II malocclusion, apical base length, nasolabial angle

Abstract

Aims: A study was conducted to find out a relationship among maxillary and mandibular base lengths, dental crowding and naso-labial angle in untreated Class I and Class II subjects in Mandi Gobindgarh, Punjab, population. Study design: Cross sectional Place of Study: Department of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopaedics, Desh Bhagat Dental College and Hospital, Desh Bhagat University Campus, Mandi Gobindgarh, Punjab. Methodology: This study included 60 pre-treatment lateral cephalograms and study models (28 class I & 32 class II) of untreated subjects with complete bilateral dental class I and complete bilateral dental class II malocclusion having all permanent teeth mesial to 1st molars & without any proximal decay and restorations. The maxillary and mandibular base lengths (Co-A and Co-Gn) and naso-labial angle were measured on pre-treatment lateral cephalogram & the tooth size-arch length discrepancies were measured on the pre-treatment dental casts. The measurements obtained from Class I and Class II subjects were further divided into two Groups each depending upon the severity of dental crowding. The obtained data was analyzed statistically with t-test and Pearson correlation coefficient (P=.05) to investigate any correlation between base length and dental crowding.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Janson G, Goizueta OE, Garib DG, Janson M. Relationship between maxillary and mandibular base lengths and dental crowding in patients with complete Class II malocclusions. Angle Orthod 2011; 81(2):217-21.

Bernabe´ E, Flores-Mir C. Dental morphology and crowding. A multivariate approach. Angle Orthod. 2006; 76:20–25.

Doris JM, Bernard BW, Kuftinec MM, Stom D. A biometric study of tooth size and dental crowding. Am J Orthod. 1981; 79:326–336.

Miethke RR, Behm-Menthel A. Correlations between lower incisor crowding and lower incisor position and lateral craniofacial morphology. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1988; 94:231–239.

Puri N, Pradhan KL, Chandna A, Sehgal V, Gupta R. Biometric study of tooth size in normal, crowded, and spaced permanent dentitions. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2007; 132:279.e277-214.

Radnzic D. Dental crowding and its relationship to mesiodistal crown diameters and arch dimensions. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1988; 94:50–56.

Richardson ME. The etiology of late lower arch crowding alternative to mesially directed forces: a review. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1994; 105:592–597.

Richardson ME. A review of changes in lower arch alignment from seven to fifty years. Semin Orthod. 1999; 5:151–159.

Sampson WJ, Richards LC. Prediction of mandibular incisor and canine crowding changes in the mixed dentition. Am J Orthod. 1985; 88:47–63.

Howe RP, McNamara JA Jr, O’Connor KA. An examination of dental crowding and its relationship to tooth size and arch dimension. Am J Orthod. 1983; 83:363–373.

Bishara SE, Jakobsen JR, Treder JE, Stasi MJ. Changes in the maxillary and mandibular tooth size-arch length relationship from early adolescence to early adulthood. A longitudinal study. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1989; 95:46–59.

Mills LF. Arch width, arch length and tooth size in young males. Angle Orthod.1964; 34:124–129.

Fastlicht J. Crowding of mandibular incisors. Am J Orthod. 1970; 58:156–163.

Peck S, Peck H. Crown dimensions and mandibular incisor alignment. Angle Orthod. 1972; 42:148–153.

Baccetti T, Franchi L, McNamara JA Jr, Tollaro I. Early dentofacial features of Class II malocclusion: a longitudinal study from the deciduous through the mixed dentition. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1997; 111:502–509.

Nance HN. The limitations of orthodontic treatment; diagnosis and treatment in the permanent dentition. Am J Orthod. 1947; 43:36–84.

Sayin MO, Turkkahraman H. Factors contributing to mandibular anterior crowding in the early mixed dentition. Angle Orthod 2004; 74(6):754-8.

Karlsen A, Krogstad O. Morphology and growth in convex profile facial patterns: A longitudinal study. The Angle Orthodontist 1999; 69(4):334-44.

Braun S, Hnat WP, Fender DE, Legan HL. The form of the human dental arch. The Angle Orthodontist 1998; 68(1):29-36.

Baccetti T, Stahl F, McNamara JA, Jr. Dentofacial growth changes in subjects with untreated Class II malocclusion from late puberty through young adulthood. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2009; 135(2):148-54.

Carter NE. Dentofacial changes in untreated Class II division 1 subjects. Br J Orthod 1987; 14(4):225-34.

Turkkahraman H, Sayin MO. Relationship between mandibular anterior crowding and lateral dentofacial morphology in the early mixed dentition. Angle Orthod. 2004; 74:759–764

Sayin MO, Turkkahraman H. Cephalometric evaluation of nongrowing females with skeletal and dental Class II, division 1 malocclusion. Angle Orthod 2005; 75(4):656-60.

Berg R. Crowding of the dental arches: a longitudinal study of the age period between 6 and 12 years. Eur J Orthod 1986; 8(1):43-9.

Fushima K, Kitamura Y, Mita H, et al. Significance of the cant of the posterior occlusal plane in class II division 1 malocclusions. Eur J Orthod 1996; 18(1):27-40.

Rosenblum RE. Class II malocclusion: mandibular retrusion or maxillary protrusion? Angle Orthod 1995; 65(1):49-62.

Karlsen AT. Craniofacial morphology in children with Angle Class II-1 malocclusion with and without deepbite. Angle Orthod 1994; 64(6):437-46.

Leighton BC, Hunter WS. Relationship between lower arch spacing/crowding and facial height and depth. Am J Orthod1982; 82(5):418-25.

Ricketts. 1957. Establishing the lip to nose relationship. The Angle Orthodontist, 27:14-21.

Satravahas et al. The significance of the integumentary profile. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics.1987; 92:422-426

Fitzgerald JP, Nanda RS, Currier GF. An evaluation of the nasolabial angle and the relative inclinations of the nose and upper lip. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics.1992; 102:328–334

Thomas M.Graber. Robert L. Vanarsdall, Jr. Katherine W.L. Vig. Orthodontics: current principles and techniques. 4 ed. Missouri: Elsevier; 2005; 36.

Legan H, Burstone CJ. Soft tissue cephalometric analysis for orthognathic surgery. Oral Surg.1980; 38:744-51.

Athanasios E Athanasiou. Orthodontic Cephalometry. London: Mosby-Wolfe; 1995; 267-268.

G.William Arnett.et al. Soft tissue cephalometric analysis: Diagnosis and treatment planning of dentofacial deformity.Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1999; 116:239-53.

Suja Ani G, Babu E.C. Correlation between Naso Labial Angle and Effective Maxillary and Mandibular lengths in untreated Class II Patients. International Journal of Interdisciplinary and Multidisciplinary Studies, 2014; 1(3):9-14.

Baccetti T, Franchi L, McNamara JA, Jr., Tollaro I. Early dentofacial features of Class II malocclusion: a longitudinal study from the deciduous through the mixed dentition. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1997; 111(5):502-9.

Lundstrom A. A study of the correlation between mandibular growth direction and changes in incisor inclination, overjet, overbite and crowding. Trans Eur Orthod Soc 1975; 131-40.