Relationship between vertical facial morphology and dental arch measurements in class II malocclusion: a retrospective study

Creative Commons License

Ocak I., Karslı N., Altuğ Demiralp A. T., Aksu M.

PeerJ, cilt.9, 2023 (SCI-Expanded) identifier identifier

  • Yayın Türü: Makale / Tam Makale
  • Cilt numarası: 9
  • Basım Tarihi: 2023
  • Doi Numarası: 10.7717/peerj.16031
  • Dergi Adı: PeerJ
  • Derginin Tarandığı İndeksler: Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED), Scopus, BIOSIS, MEDLINE, Veterinary Science Database, Directory of Open Access Journals
  • Anahtar Kelimeler: Arch dimension, Class II malocclusion, Vertical morphology
  • Ankara Üniversitesi Adresli: Evet

Özet

Background: To evaluate the relationship between dental arch measurements and the vertical facial pattern determined in skeletal Class II untreated patients. Methods: Lateral cephalograms and plaster models were obtained from 124 untreated female adults (average age: 17.6 ± 3.8 years). Class I (CI), Class II Division 1 (CII/1) and Class II Division 2 (CII/2) malocclusions were divided into three subgroups according to their vertical morphology as hypodivergent, normodivergent and hyperdivergent. The multivariate variance analysis (MANOVA) method was used in the comparison of measurement values according to vertical and sagittal morphology. The relationship between both A point-Nasion-B point (ANB) and Frankfurt-mandibular plane (FMA) angles and dental arch measurements was examined by Pearson correlation analysis. The significance level was received as p < 0.05. Results: While vertical morphology has a statistically significant effect on mandibular arch length, sagittal morphology affects maxillary arch depth. The parameters influenced by both morphologies are maxillary and mandibular arch length, as well as maxillary intermolar width. The mandibular arch length was significantly shorter in hyperdivergent-CII-2 malocclusion (50.5 ± 7.4 mm). Larger values were obtained in both mandibular arch length and maxillary arch depth measurements in CII-1 malocclusion compared to CII-2 malocclusion. The maxillary intermolar width was significantly shorter in hypodivergent-CII-1 malocclusion (46.8 ± 3.4 mm), while it was higher in hypodivergent-CI malocclusion (51.1 ± 3.4 mm). The maxillary arch length was the lowest in hyperdivergent-CI malocclusion (63.1 ± 13.3 mm) and the highest in hypodivergent-CI malocclusion (72.8 ± 7.6 mm). Additionally, a positive but weak correlation was found between ANB and FMA angles. Conclusion: Dental arch measurements have been found to be affected by both vertical facial morphology and skeletal sagittal relationship. A positive correlation was found between ANB and FMA angles.