The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

Register      Login

SEARCH WITHIN CONTENT

FIND ARTICLE

Volume / Issue

Online First

Archive
Related articles

VOLUME 13 , ISSUE 6 ( November-December, 2012 ) > List of Articles

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Over-bite and Vertical Changes following First Premolar Extraction in High Angle Cases

KS Girish, GC Ramesh, MC Pradeep, G Arun Kumar, BS Suresh

Citation Information : Girish K, Ramesh G, Pradeep M, Kumar GA, Suresh B. Over-bite and Vertical Changes following First Premolar Extraction in High Angle Cases. J Contemp Dent Pract 2012; 13 (6):812-818.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-1234

Published Online: 01-12-2012

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2012; Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) Ltd.


Abstract

Aims and objectives

Orthodontists generally agree that nonextraction treatment is associated with downward and backward rotation of the mandible and an increase in the lower anterior face height (LAFH). They also agree that extraction line of treatment is associated with upward and forward rotation of the mandible and decrease in the LAFH. The intent of this cephalometric investigation was to examine the wedge hypothesis, that the vertical dimension collapses after first bicuspid extraction. The present study was undertaken to evaluate the cephalometric overbite and vertical changes following first premolar extraction in high angle cases.

Materials and methods

Forty-five adult patients having high mandibular plane angle, i.e. Gogn – SN more than or equal to 32° having class I molar and canine relation were included. Preand post-treatment lateral cephalograms were measured and compared to analyze the cephalometric changes.

Results

There was no decrease in the overbite and vertical changes following first premolar extraction in high angle cases.

Clinical significance

The facial complex does increase in size with growth, but mandibular plane while moving inferiorly, remain essentially parallel to its pretreatment position due to residual growth and treatment mechanics.

Conclusion

The study concluded that, There was no decrease in the vertical facial dimension, overbite and mandibular plane angle. However, it should be interpreted with caution, given the small sample size.

How to cite this article

Ramesh GC, Pradeep MC, Kumar GA, Girish KS, Suresh BS. Over-bite and Vertical Changes following First Premolar Extraction in High Angle Cases. J Contemp Dent Pract 2012;13(6):812-818.


PDF Share
  1. Cephalometric changes in overbite and vertical facial height after removal of four first molar or first premolars. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2006;130(2):183-88.
  2. TMJ research. Responsibility and risk. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1992;102(1):1-14.
  3. Angle versus Calvin S. Case: Extraction vs nonextraction. Part I Historical Revisionism. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1992;102(5):464-70.
  4. Vertical growth versus anteroposterior growth as related function and treatment. Angle Orthod 1964; 34(2):75-93. Angle Orthod 1964;34(2):75-93.
  5. The rotation of the mandible resulting from growth; Its implication in orthodontic treatment. Angle Orthod 1965;35(1):36-50.
  6. The control of vertical overbite in clinical orthodontics. Angle Orthod 1968;38(1):19-39.
  7. Extreme variations in vertical facial growth and associated variation in skeletal and dental relations. Angle Orthod 1971;41(3):219-29.
  8. Effects of first bicuspid extractions on facial height in high-angle cases. J Clin Orthod 1993;27(11):294-98.
  9. Angle Orthod 1973;43:194-200.
  10. Dentofacial vertical proportions. Am J Orthod 1964;50(11):801-23.
  11. Growth patterns in subjects with long and short faces. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1990;98(5):247-58.
  12. The short face syndrome. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1978;73(5):499-511.
  13. Natural head position, a basic consideration in the interpretation of cephalometric radiographs. Am J Phy Anthropol 1958;16(3):213-34.
  14. Vertical changes following first premolar extractions. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1994;105(1):19-24.
  15. The effects of extraction versus non-extraction orthodontic treatment on growth of the lower anterior face height. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1993;104(4):361-68.
  16. The effects of first premolar extraction on vertical dimension. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1999;116(1):41-45.
  17. The reproducibility of natural head posture: A methodological study. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1988;93(4):280-88.
  18. Cephalometric changes in clinical practice. Am J Orthod 1959;29(1):8-29.
  19. Vertical changes in high mandibular plane cases following enucleation of second premolars. Angle Orthod 1990;60(3):263-67.
  20. Cephalometric assessment of dentofacial vertical changes in Class I subjects treated with and without extraction. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2008;133(6):869-75.
  21. First or second premolar extraction effects on facial vertical dimension. Angle Orthod 2005;75(2):177-182.
  22. Influence of extraction and non-extraction orthodontic treatment in Japanese-Brazilians with Class I and Class II Division 1 malocclusion. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2005;127(1):30-36.
  23. Vertical changes in class II division 1 malocclusion after premolar extractions. Angle Orthod 76(1):52-58.
  24. Postorthodontic dental changes. A long study. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1998;114(5):581-86.
  25. Changes in the craniofacial complex from adolescence to midadulthood: A cephalometric study. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1999;115(5):521-32.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.