Thin-plate Spline Analysis of Craniofacial Growth in Class I and Class II Subjects

Abstract

Objective: To compare the craniofacial growth characteristics of untreated subjects with Class II division 1 malocclusion with those of subjects with normal (Class I) occlusion from the prepubertal through the postpubertal stages of development. Materials and Methods: The Class II division 1 sample consisted of 17 subjects (11 boys and six girls). The Class I sample also consisted of 17 subjects (13 boys and four girls). Three craniofacial regions (cranial base, maxilla, and mandible) were analyzed on the lateral cephalograms of the subjects in both groups by means of thin-plate spline analysis at T1 (prepubertal) and T2 (postpubertal). Both cross-sectional and longitudinal comparisons were performed on both size and shape differences between the two groups. Results:The results showed an increased cranial base angulation as a morphological feature of Class II malocclusion at the prepubertal developmental phase. Maxillary changes in either shape or size were not significant. Subjects with Class II malocclusion exhibited a significant deficiency in the size of the mandible at the completion of active craniofacial growth as compared with Class I subjects. Conclusion: A significant deficiency in the size of the mandible became apparent in Class II subjects during the circumpubertal period and it was still present at the completion of active craniofacial growth.

Morphometric analysis of treatment effects of the Balters bionator in growing Class II patients

“…The matrix of Procrustes residuals can be used for any statistical procedure. 8,22 Statistical analysis of shape differences was performed by means of permutation tests with 1000 random permutations on Goodall F statistics (tpsRegr version 1.38, Ecology & Evolution).…”

“…These morphometric methods can shed light on the skeletal effects arising from the use of orthopedic appliances in the treatment of malocclusions. [8][9][10][11] Among different therapies available to treat Class II malocclusion, the Balters bionator is a functional appliance designed and introduced by Wilhelm Balters in the 1960s. 12,13 The bionator moves the mandible anteriorly so that over time a new postural position of the lower arch is achieved, improving the maxillomandibular relationship.…”

Posterior cranial base natural growth and development: A systematic review

“…Of the 23 articles, 5 were cross-sectional in design, 13,[16][17][18][19] while the remaining 18 were cohort studies. 2,[20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35][36] Samples consisted of craniofacial measurements from living or deceased postnatal human skulls. Validity of the measurements was not determined in any of the studies, while only six reported some form of reliability assessment.…”

A comparative study of craniofacial measurements between Ryukyuan and mainland Japanese females using lateral cephalometric images

“…A comparative study of craniofacial measurements between Ryukyuan and mainland Japanese females using lateral cephalometric images For over 80 years, the cephalogram has been a standard tool for orthodontic research on facial growth patterns (Franchi et al, 2007;Buschang and Jacob, 2014) as well as for diagnosis of the degree of malocclusion, treatment planning, and assessment of treatment efficacy (Broadbent, 1931;Steiner, 1953;Ricketts, 1957;Xiong et al, 2013). Orthodontists have examined worldwide ethnic groups to establish the cephalometric norms for each group (Cotton et al, 1951;Nanda and Nanda, 1969;Richardson, 1980;Bacon et al, 1983;Bishara et al, 1990;Swlerenga et al, 1994;Hwang et al, 2001).…”