The Angle orthodontist · 2014
Mandibular growth comparisons of Class I and Class II division 1 skeletofacial patterns.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Jacob Helder B, Buschang Peter H
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To determine class and sex differences in mandibular growth and modeling.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A mixed-longitudinal sample of 130 untreated French-Canadian adolescents, 77 (45 boys and 32 girls) with Class I (normal or abnormal) occlusion and 53 (26 boys and 27 girls) with Class II division 1 malocclusion, was used. Based on eight landmarks, eight traditional measurements were used to compare the anteroposterior position of the maxilla and mandible, relationship between the jaws, and mandibular size. Mandibular superimpositions were used to compare the horizontal and vertical changes of condylion, gonion, and menton.
RESULTS: While there were no differences in maxillary position based on the SNA angle, Class IIs had more retrognathic mandibles than did Class Is. Total mandibular length was greater in Class Is than in Class IIs at 15 years of age. Superior and total growth and modeling changes at condylion and gonion, respectively, were greater for Class Is than Class IIs. Boys were more prognathic than girls; they had larger mandibles and exhibited greater size increases and growth changes than girls did.
CONCLUSIONS: There are both class and sex differences in mandibular growth and modeling.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A mixed-longitudinal sample of 130 untreated French-Canadian adolescents, 77 (45 boys and 32 girls) with Class I (normal or abnormal) occlusion and 53 (26 boys and 27 girls) with Class II division 1 malocclusion, was used. Based on eight landmarks, eight traditional measurements were used to compare the anteroposterior position of the maxilla and mandible, relationship between the jaws, and mandibular size. Mandibular superimpositions were used to compare the horizontal and vertical changes of condylion, gonion, and menton.
RESULTS: While there were no differences in maxillary position based on the SNA angle, Class IIs had more retrognathic mandibles than did Class Is. Total mandibular length was greater in Class Is than in Class IIs at 15 years of age. Superior and total growth and modeling changes at condylion and gonion, respectively, were greater for Class Is than Class IIs. Boys were more prognathic than girls; they had larger mandibles and exhibited greater size increases and growth changes than girls did.
CONCLUSIONS: There are both class and sex differences in mandibular growth and modeling.