Mandibular Asymmetry in Class II Subdivision Malocclusion

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the condylar and ramal mandibular asymmetry in a group of patients with Class II subdivision malocclusion to identify possible gender differences between male and female subjects. Materials and Methods: Mandibular asymmetry measurements (condylar, ramal, and condylarplus-ramal asymmetry values) were performed on the panoramic radiographs of 80 subjects (34 male and 46 female). The study group consisted of 40 Class II subdivision patients (18 male and 22 female; mean age 14.53 Ϯ 3.14 years). The control group consisted of 40 subjects with normal occlusion (16 male and 24 female; mean age 14.43 Ϯ 3.05 years). The Kruskal-Wallis test was used to determine the possible statistically significant differences between the groups for condylar, ramal, and condylar-plus-ramal asymmetry index measurements. Identified differences between groups were further analyzed using the Mann-Whitney U-test at the 95% confidence interval (P Ͻ .05). Results: No gender-related difference was found for any of the asymmetry indices. Comparison of condylar, ramal, and condylar-plus-ramal asymmetry index values and gonial angle measurements for Class I and Class II sides in the Class II subdivision group and for right and left sides in the Class I group showed no statistically significant differences. However, the Class II subdivision group has longer values for condylar, ramal, and condylar-plus-ramal height measurements and only these differences were statistically significant (P Ͻ .001). Conclusions: Except for condylar ramal and condylar-plus-ramal height measurements, Class II subdivision patients have symmetrical condyles when compared to normal occlusion samples according to Habbet's mandibular asymmetry indices.

Sınıf II subdivizyon maloklüzyonda mandibular asimetrinin değerlendirmesi

“…It has also been used for the assessment of side-to-side dimensional differences and to define the asymmetries (Habets et al 1987, Miller et al 1996, Miller et al 1997, Saglam 2003, Kiki et al 2007, Sezgin et al 2007, Kurt et al 2008. The use of OPG for specific measurements and the determination of differences is controversial owing to considerations relating to magnification and distortion.…”

“…Kurt et al (2008) investigated condylar and ramal asymmetry in Class II subdivision subjects, and found no significant gender differences when comparing sides. Sezgin et al (2007) found no gender differences in mandibular asymmetry when investigating different occlusion patterns.…”

“…Asymmetric malocclusions such as: unilateral crossbite, Class II subdivision, and cleft lip cause asymmetric development of the facial complex, but an important point is the degree of asymmetry (Kiki et al 2007, Kilic et al 2008, Kurt et al 2008. Kurt et al (2008) reported that condylar, ramal, and condylar-plus-ramal height values were significantly higher in the Class II subdivision group than the normal occlusion group and there were no significant differences in the asymmetry indices of measurements in the Class II subdivision group compared with mormal occlusion subjects.…”

“…On the other hand, Janson et al (2007) showed that skeletal positioning was not innocent in Class II subdivision malocclusion, and there was a tendency for mandibular asymmetry compared with the control group. Kurt et al (2008) investigated condylar asymmetry in Class II subdivision and found that the Class II subdivision group exhibited greater condylar, ramal, and condylar-ramal height values than the control group.…”

“…Kurt et al (2008) investigated condylar asymmetry in Class II subdivision and found that the Class II subdivision group exhibited greater condylar, ramal, and condylar-ramal height values than the control group.…”