Components of adult class III malocclusion

Ellis, Edward; McNamara, James A.

doi:10.1016/0278-2391(84)90109-5

Cited by 326 publications

(193 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

159

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Although this hypothesis has been supported in numerous studies (Hopkin et al, 1968;Guyer et al, 1986;Ellis and McNamara, 1984;Williams and Andersen, 1986;Kerr and Adams, 1988;Battagel, 1993Battagel, , 1994Sato, 1994), others disagree (Anderson and Popovich, 1983). Results from this study concur with these earlier findings and indicate that the saddle angle (NSBa) as well as the two other cranial base angles (NSAr and NPcBo) show differences between the Class I and Class III configurations, with more acute angles in the Class III morphology.…”

Section: Cranial Base In Class III Subjectssupporting

confidence: 82%

“…This group of malocclusions is characterized generally by several developmental and craniofacial features, including an acute mandibular plane angle, obtuse gonial angle, and an overdeveloped mandible/underdeveloped maxilla (Jacobson et al, 1974;Ellis and McNamara, 1984;Sato, 1994).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Maxillary retrognathia, without mandibular prognathism, has been reported to occur in between 20 and 30% of adult patients with Class III malocclusions (Sanborn, 1955;Dietrich, 1970;Jacobson et al, 1974;Ellis and McNamara, 1984). The cranial base is a likely anatomical candidate to be involved in Class III malocclusions, since it forms the central core of the cranium, providing a major support structure on which the midface develops.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Morphometry of the Cranial Base in Subjects with Class III Malocclusion

1997

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. The significance of the cranial base in the development of Class III malocclusion remains uncertain. The purpose of this study was to determine whether the form of the cranial base differs between prepubertal Class I and Class III subjects. Lateral cephalographs of 73 children of European-American descent aged between 5 and 11 years with Class III malocclusion were compared with those of their counterparts with a normal, Class I molar occlusion. The cephalographs were traced, checked, and subdivided into seven age-and sex-matched groups. Average geometries, scaled to an equivalent size, were generated based on 13 craniofacial landmarks by means of Procrustes analysis, and these configurations were statistically tested for equivalence. Bivariate and multivariate analyses utilizing 5 linear and angular measurements were undertaken to corroborate the Procrustes analysis. Graphical analysis, utilizing thin-plate spline and finite element methods, was performed for localization of differences in cranial base morphology. Results indicated that cranial base morphology differed statistically for all age-wise comparisons. Graphical analysis revealed that the greatest differences in morphology occurred in the posterior cranial base region, which generally consisted of horizontal compression, vertical expansion, and size contraction. The sphenoidal region displayed expansion, while the anterior regions showed shearing and local increases in size. It is concluded that the shape of the cranial base differs in subjects with Class III malocclusion compared with the normal Class I configuration, due in part to deficient orthocephalization, or failure of the cranial base to flatten during development.

show abstract

Section: Cranial Base In Class III Subjectssupporting

confidence: 82%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Morphometry of the Cranial Base in Subjects with Class III Malocclusion

1997

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…2,[6][7][8][9] The surgical-orthodontic approaches to skeletal CIII patients include preoperative orthodontic treatment to decompensate the malocclusion, followed by surgical correction of the skeletal discrepancy, and postoperative compensation for detailing of the occlusion.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Skeletal anteroposterior discrepancy and vertical type effects on lower incisor preoperative decompensation and postoperative compensation in skeletal Class III patients

Ahn¹,

Baek²

2011

The Angle Orthodontist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To determine the initial compensation, preoperative decompensation, and postoperative compensation of the lower incisors according to the skeletal anteroposterior discrepancy and vertical type in skeletal Class III patients. Materials and Methods: The samples consisted of 68 skeletal Class III patients treated with twojaw surgery and orthodontic treatment. Lateral cephalograms were taken before preoperative orthodontic treatment (T0) and before surgery (T1) and after debonding (T2). According to skeletal anteroposterior discrepancy/vertical type (ANB, criteria 5 24u; SN-GoMe, criteria 5 35u) at the T0 stage, the samples were allocated into group 1 (severe anteroposterior discrepancy/hypodivergent vertical type, N 5 17), group 2 (moderate anteroposterior discrepancy/hypodivergent vertical type, N 5 17), group 3 (severe anteroposterior discrepancy/hyperdivergent vertical type, N 5 17), or group 4 (moderate anteroposterior discrepancy/hyperdivergent vertical type, N 5 17). After measurement of variables, one-way analysis of variance with Duncan's multiple comparison test, crosstab analysis, and Pearson correlation analysis were performed. Results: At T0, groups 3 and 2 exhibited the most and least compensated lower incisors. In group 2, good preoperative decompensation and considerable postoperative compensation resulted in different values for T0, T1, and T2 (IMPA, T0 , T2 , T1; P , .001). However, group 3 did not show significant changes in IMPA between stages. Therefore, groups 2 and 3 showed different decompensation achievement ratios (P , .05). Group 3 exhibited the worst ratios of decompensation and stability (24% and 6%, respectively, P , .001). Anteroposterior discrepancy/vertical type (ANB: P , .01 at T0 and T1, P , .001 at T2; SN-GoMe: P , .01, all stages) were strongly correlated with relative percentage ratio of IMPA to norm value. Conclusions: Skeletal anteroposterior discrepancy/vertical type results in differences in the amount and pattern of initial compensation, preoperative decompensation, and postoperative compensation of lower incisors in Class III patients. (Angle Orthod. 2011;81:64-74.)

show abstract

“…Une morphologie basi-crânienne particulière, avec une angulation sphéno-occipitale plus marquée ou une portion basi-crânienne postérieure réduite, qui avance la position de la fosse mandibulaire, peut contribuer également au prognathisme mandibulaire [14,31,37,40].…”

Section: Phénotype De Classe IIIunclassified

Jumeaux et héritabilité des phénotypes dento-faciaux

Cohen-Lévy

Kamoun-Goldrat²,

Simon³

et al. 2007

Orthod Fr

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

RÉSUMÉ -En orthopédie dento-faciale, où facteurs génétiques et environnementaux s'interpénètrent depuis les premières phases du développement, le clinicien cherche à déterminer dans quelle mesure sa thérapeutique pourra influencer le schéma de croissance des patients. L'étude des jumeaux monozygotes (MZ) et dizygotes (DZ), dans leurs ressemblances, mais également dans leurs différences, apporte des éléments de réponse. . . mais soulève également de nombreuses questions. Nous reprenons dans cet article des études cliniques et des rapports de cas sur les aspects diagnostiques et thérapeutiques des malocclusions. MOTS CLÉS -Jumeaux / Génétique / Malocclusions / OrthodontieABSTRACT -In orthodontics and dentofacial orthopaedics, where genetic and environmental factors interpenetrate from the early stages of development, the clinician tries to determine how mechanics could influence patient's growth pattern. Comparing monozygotic and dizygotic twins, in their similarities and their differences, gives some answers... but raises some questions too. In this article, we gather some clinical studies and case reports, on diagnosis and treatment aspects of malocclusions.

show abstract

Components of adult class III malocclusion

Cited by 326 publications

References 12 publications

Morphometry of the Cranial Base in Subjects with Class III Malocclusion

Morphometry of the Cranial Base in Subjects with Class III Malocclusion

Skeletal anteroposterior discrepancy and vertical type effects on lower incisor preoperative decompensation and postoperative compensation in skeletal Class III patients

Jumeaux et héritabilité des phénotypes dento-faciaux

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About