The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

Register      Login



Volume / Issue

Online First

Related articles

VOLUME 20 , ISSUE 8 ( August, 2019 ) > List of Articles


A Review on Comparison of Tooth Size Discrepancies among Angle\'s Class I, II, and III Malocclusion: Is There a Significance?

Mehjabeen A Jabri, Song Wu, Yaoyuan Zhang, Junqing Ma, Lin Wang

Keywords : Angle class I, Angle class II, Angle class III, Malocclusion, Mandible, Maxilla, Orthodontics

Citation Information : Jabri MA, Wu S, Zhang Y, Ma J, Wang L. A Review on Comparison of Tooth Size Discrepancies among Angle\'s Class I, II, and III Malocclusion: Is There a Significance?. J Contemp Dent Pract 2019; 20 (8):994-999.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-2615

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 00-08-2019

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2019; Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) Ltd.


Aim: The contemporary article aims to review and compare various literatures concerning different conclusions regarding the correlation between tooth size discrepancy (TSD) and Angle\'s malocclusion groups. Background: Acquiring the ideal occlusion plays one of the major roles while designing the treatment plan for an orthodontic patient, any alterations in the individual tooth sizes are called TSD and will hinder this prime requirement. By determining the correct tooth size ratio, it further helps in acquiring the accurate interdigitation, balanced occlusion, and also predicting the orthodontic treatment results. Various investigations were carried out to know the correlation between tooth size discrepancies and different malocclusion groups, of which, a few reported a statistically significant difference whereas others reported no significant difference. Review results: A computerized database quest was operated utilizing the Medline database (Pubmed/Medline) for original research and review articles. Publications between 1946 and 2018 were included. Four hundred twenty-one articles were recovered from database search and, among them, 66 articles were selected to review the full-article. Conclusion: Although a comparison was done between the tooth-size ratios and malocclusion groups (classes I, II, and III), many investigators noted no significant difference but there is an inadequacy in the data particularly related to subgroups of Angle\'s classification of malocclusion among these investigations; therefore, further studies are required to interpret this correlation. Clinical significance: As there is high incidence of tooth size discrepancies noted in the previous literature orthodontist, Bolton\'s analysis regardless of malocclusion group, sex, and ethnicity is highly recommended.

PDF Share
  1. Al-Gunaid T, Yamaki M, et al. Mesiodistal tooth width and tooth size discrepancies of Yemeni Arabians: A pilot study. J Ortho Sci 2012 Apr;1(2):40–45. DOI: 10.4103/2278-0203.99760.
  2. Black GV. Descriptive Anatomy of the Human Teeth. Philadelphia: S.S. White Dental Mfg. Co; 1902.
  3. Bolton WA. Disharmony in tooth size and its relation to the analysis and treatment of malocclusion. Angle 1958;28(3):113–130.
  4. McLaughlin RP, Bennett JC, et al. Systemized Orthodontic Treatment Mechanics. London: Mosby.; 2001. pp. 4, 6, 281.
  5. Crossby DR, Alexander CG. The occurrence of tooth size discrepancies among different malocclusion groups. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1989 Jun;95(6):457–461. DOI: 10.1016/0889-5406(89)90408-3.
  6. Ta TA, Ling JY, et al. Tooth-size discrepancies among different occlusion groups of southern Chinese children. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2001 Nov;120(5):556–558. DOI: 10.1067/mod.2001.118998.
  7. Uysal T, Sari Z. Intermaxillary tooth size discrepancy and mesiodistal crown dimensions for a Turkish population. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2005 Aug;128(2):226–230. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2004.04.029.
  8. Endo T, Shundo I, et al. Applicability of Bolton's tooth size ratios to a Japanese orthodontic population. Odontology 2007 Jul;95(1):57–60. DOI: 10.1007/s10266-007-0066-8.
  9. Aaraujo E, Souki M. Bolton anterior tooth size discrepancies among different malocclusion groups. Angle Orthod 2003 Jun;73(3):307–313.
  10. Prasanna AL, Venkatramana V, et al. Evaluation and Comparison of Intermaxillary Tooth Size Discrepancy among Class I, Class II Division 1, and Class III Subjects Using Bolton's Analysis: An in vitro Study. J Int Oral Health 2015 Sep;7(9):58–64.
  11. Neff CW. The size relationship between the maxillary and mandibular anterior segments of the dental arch. Angle Orthodontist 1957;27(3):138–147.
  12. Lunstrom A. Intermaxillary tooth width ratio and tooth alignment and occlusion. Acta Odontol Scand 1955 Feb;12(3–4):265–292. DOI: 10.3109/00016355509028167.
  13. Hasija N, Bala M, et al. Estimation of Tooth Size Discrepancies among Different Malocclusion Groups. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2014 May;7(2):82–85. DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10005-1242.
  14. Bernabé E, Major PW, et al. Tooth-width ratio discrepancies in a sample of Peruvian adolescents. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2004;125(3):361–365. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2003.04.008.
  15. Ackerman JL, Profitt WR, et al. Pitch, roll, and yaw: describing the spatial orientation of dentofacial traits. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2007 Mar;131(3):305–310. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2006.05.032.
  16. Miller SF, Vela KC, et al. Patterns of morphological integration in the dental arches of individuals with malocclusion. Am J Hum Biol 2016 Nov;28(6):879–889. DOI: 10.1002/ajhb.22880.
  17. Howel PG. Incisal relationships during speech. J Prosthet Dent 1986 Jul;56(1):93–99. DOI: 10.1016/0022-3913(86)90289-1.
  18. Singh GD. Morphologic determinants in the etiology of class III malocclusions: a review. Clin Anat 1999;12(5):382–405. DOI: 10.1002/(SICI)1098-2353(1999)12:5<382::AID-CA9>3.0.CO;2-0.
  19. Ruf S, Pancherz H. Class II Division 2 malocclusion:genetics or environment? A case report of monozygotic twins. Angle Orthod 1999 Aug;69(4):321–324. DOI: 10.1043/0003-3219(1999)069<0321:CIDMGO>2.3.CO;2.
  20. Basdra EK, Kiokpasoglou M, et al. The Class II Division 2 craniofacial type is associated with numerous congenital tooth anomalies. Eur J Orthod 2000 Oct;22(5):529–535. DOI: 10.1093/ejo/22.5.529.
  21. Xue F, Wong RW, et al. Genes, genetics, and Class III malocclusion. Orthod Craniofac Res 2010 May;13(2):69–74. DOI: 10.1111/j.1601-6343.2010.01485.x.
  22. Baccetti T, Reyes BC, et al. Gender differences in Class III malocclusion. Angle Orthod 2005;75(4):510–520.
  23. Angle EH. Treatment of malocclusion of the teeth and fractures of the maxillae; Angle's system, 6th ed. Philadelphia: SS White Manufacturing; 1900, pp. 37–44, vol. 6–8.
  24. Proffit WR, Fields Jr HW, et al. Prevalence of malocclusion and orthodontic treatment need in the United States: estimates from the NHANES III survey. Int J Adult Orthodon Orthognath Surg 1998;13(2):97–106.
  25. Smith SS, Buschang PH, et al. Interarch tooth size relationships of 3 populations:“does Bolton's analysis apply?”. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2000 Feb;117(2):169–174. DOI: 10.1016/S0889-5406(00) 70228-9.
  26. Lavelle CL. Maxillary and mandibular tooth size in different racial groups and in different occlusal categories. Am J Orthod 1972 Jan;61(1):29–37. DOI: 10.1016/0002-9416(72)90173-X.
  27. Seipel C. Variation in tooth position, A metric study of variation and adaption in the deciduous and permanent dentitions. Swed Dent J 1946;39:1–176.
  28. Potter RH. Univariate vs multivariate differences in tooth size according to sex. J Dent Res 1972 May–Jun;51(3):716–722. DOI: 10.1177/00220345720510030501.
  29. Arya BS, Savara BS, et al. Relation of sex and occlusion to mesiodistal tooth size. Am J Orthod 1974 Nov;66(5):479–486. DOI: 10.1016/0002-9416(74)90109-2.
  30. Doris JM, Bernard BW, et al. A biometric study of tooth size and dental crowding. Am J Orthod 1981 Mar;79(3):326–336. DOI: 10.1016/0002-9416(81)90080-4.
  31. Othman S, Harradine N. Tooth size discrepancies in an orthodontic population. Angle Orthod 2007 Jul;77(4):668–674. DOI: 10.2319/031406-102.
  32. Sameshima GT. Bolton tooth size variation among four ethnic groups. Eur J Orthod 2006;45:234–250.
  33. Sperry TP, Worms FW, et al. Tooth-size discrepancy in mandibular prognathism. Am J Orthod 1977 Aug;72(2):183–190. DOI: 10.1016/0002-9416(77)90059-8.
  34. Xia Z, Wu XY. The application of dentocclusal measurement in malocclusion. Stomatology 1983;3:126–127.
  35. Qiaong N, Jiuxiang L. Comparison of intermaxillary tooth size discrepancies among different malocclusion groups. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1999;116:539–554. DOI: 10.1016/S0889-5406(99)70186-1.
  36. Cua-Benward GB, Dibaj S, et al. The prevalance of congenitally missing teeth in Class I, Class II, Class III malocclusions. J Clin Pediatr Dent 1992;17:15–17.
  37. Richardson ER, Malhotra SK. Mesiodistal crown dimension of the permanent dentition of American Negroes. Am J Orthod 1975 Aug;68(2):157–164. DOI: 10.1016/0002-9416(75)90204-3.
  38. Fattahi HR, Pakshir HR, et al. Comparison of tooth size discrepancies among different malocclusion groups. Eur J Orthod 2006 Oct;28(5):491–495. DOI: 10.1093/ejo/cjl012.
  39. Lopatiene K, Dumbravaite A. Relationship between tooth size discrepancies and malocclusion. Stomatologija 2009;11(4):119–124.
  40. Endo T, Abe R, et al. Tooth size discrepancies among different malocclusions in a Japanese orthodontic population. Angle Orthod 2008 Nov;78(6):994–999. DOI: 10.2319/101007-486.1.
  41. Al-Khateeb SN, Abu Alhaija ES. Tooth size discrepancies and arch parameters among different malocclusions in a Jordanian sample. Angle Orthod 2006 May;76(3):459–465. DOI: 10.1043/0003- 3219(2006)076[0459:TSDAAP]2.0.CO;2.
  42. Batool I, Abbas A, et al. Evaluation of tooth size discrepancy in different malocclusion groups. J Ayub Med Coll Abbottabad 2008 Oct–Dec;20(4):51–54.
  43. Nie Q, Lin J. Comparison of intermaxillary tooth size discrepancies among different malocclusion groups. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1999 Nov;116(5):539–544. DOI: 10.1016/S0889-5406(99) 70186-1.
  44. Hashim HA, Murshid Z. Mesiodistal tooth width in a Saudi population: A preliminary report. Saudi Dent J 1992;5:68–72. DOI: 10.4103/2278-0203.99760.
  45. Basaran G, Selek M, et al. Intermaxillary Bolton tooth size discrepancies among different malocclusion groups. Angle Orthod 2006 Jan;76(1):26–30. DOI: 10.1043/0003-3219(2006)076[0026:IBTSDA]2.0.CO;2.
  46. Uysal T, Sari Z, et al. Intermaxillary tooth size discrepancy and malocclusion: is there a relation? Angle Orthod 2005 Mar;75(2): 208–213. DOI: 10.1043/0003-3219(2005)075<0204:ITSDAM>2.0.CO;2.
  47. Murshid Z, Hashim HA. Mesiodistal tooth width in a Saudi population: a preliminary report. Saudi Dent J 1992;5:68–72.
  48. Hattab FN, al-Khateeb S, et al. Mesiodistal crown diameters of permanent teeth in Jordanians. Arch Oral Biol 1996 Jul;41(7):641–645. DOI: 10.1016/S0003-9969(96)00066-0.
  49. Leung EMY, Yang Y, et al. A Comparative Analysis of Tooth Size Discrepancy between Male and Female Subjects Presenting with a Class I Malocclusion. Scientific World Journal 2018 Jul;2018:7641908. DOI: 10.1155/2018/7641908.
  50. Ghose LJ, Baghdady VS. Analysis of the Iraqi dentition: mesiodistal crown diameters of permanent teeth. J Dent Res 1979 Mar;58(3): 1047–1054. DOI: 10.1177/00220345790580030301.
  51. Cançado RH, Gonçalves Júnior W, et al. Association between Bolton discrepancy and Angle malocclusions. Braz Oral Res 2015;29:1–6. DOI: 10.1590/1807-3107BOR-2015.vol29.0116.
  52. Aldrees AM, Al-Shujaa AM, et al. Is arch form influenced by sagittal molar relationship or Bolton tooth-size discrepancy? BMC Oral Health 2015 Jun;15:70. DOI: 10.1186/s12903-015-0062-2.
  53. Akyalçin S, Doğan S, et al. Bolton tooth size discrepancies in skeletal Class I individuals presenting with different dental angle classifications. Angle Orthod 2006 Jul;76(4):637–643. DOI: 10.1043/0003-3219(2006)076[0637:BTSDIS]2.0.CO;2.
  54. Johe RS, Steinhart T, et al. Intermaxillary tooth-size discrepancies in different sexes, malocclusion groups, and ethnicities. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2010 Nov;138(5):599–607. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2008.11.031.
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.