American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics : official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics · 2008
Longitudinal growth changes in untreated subjects with Class II Division 1 malocclusion.
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.
Stahl Franka, Baccetti Tiziano, Franchi Lorenzo, McNamara James A
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this longitudinal study was to compare the craniofacial growth changes in untreated subjects with Class II Division 1 malocclusion with those in subjects with normal (Class I) occlusion from the prepubertal through the postpubertal stages of development, as defined by a biological indicator of individual skeletal maturity (cervical vertebral maturation method).
METHODS: The Class II Division 1 sample consisted of 17 subjects (11 boys, 6 girls). The Class I sample also consisted of 17 subjects (13 boys, 4 girls). The lateral cephalograms of the subjects in both groups were analyzed at 6 consecutive stages of development, from CS1 through CS6. The statistical comparisons of the growth changes in the study groups were performed with Mann-Whitney U tests.
RESULTS: Craniofacial growth in subjects with untreated Class II malocclusion is essentially similar to that in untreated subjects with normal occlusion at all developmental intervals, with the exception of significantly smaller increases in mandibular length (P <0.001) at the growth spurt (interval CS3-CS4) and during the overall observation period (intervals CS1-CS6).
CONCLUSIONS: Class II dentoskeletal disharmony does not tend to self-correct with growth in association with worsening of the deficiency in total mandibular length and mandibular ramus height.
METHODS: The Class II Division 1 sample consisted of 17 subjects (11 boys, 6 girls). The Class I sample also consisted of 17 subjects (13 boys, 4 girls). The lateral cephalograms of the subjects in both groups were analyzed at 6 consecutive stages of development, from CS1 through CS6. The statistical comparisons of the growth changes in the study groups were performed with Mann-Whitney U tests.
RESULTS: Craniofacial growth in subjects with untreated Class II malocclusion is essentially similar to that in untreated subjects with normal occlusion at all developmental intervals, with the exception of significantly smaller increases in mandibular length (P <0.001) at the growth spurt (interval CS3-CS4) and during the overall observation period (intervals CS1-CS6).
CONCLUSIONS: Class II dentoskeletal disharmony does not tend to self-correct with growth in association with worsening of the deficiency in total mandibular length and mandibular ramus height.