The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

Register      Login

SEARCH WITHIN CONTENT

FIND ARTICLE

Volume / Issue

Online First

Archive
Volume  23 (2022)
Volume  22 (2021)
Volume  21 (2020)
Volume  20 (2019)
Volume  19 (2018)
Volume  18 (2017)
Volume  17 (2016)
Volume  16 (2015)
Volume  15 (2014)
Volume  14 (2013)
Volume  13 (2012)
Volume  12 (2011)
Volume  11 (2010)
Volume  10 (2009)
Volume  9 (2008)
Volume  8 (2007)
Volume  7 (2006)
Volume  6 (2005)
Volume  5 (2004)
Volume  4 (2003)
Volume  3 (2002)
Volume  2 (2001)
Volume  1 (1999)
Related articles

VOLUME 15 , ISSUE 6 ( November-December, 2014 ) > List of Articles

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Is It Possible to use Cross-sectional and Vertical Facial Measurements to establish the Shape of the Mandibular Arch?

Adilson Luiz Ramos, Ossam Abu El Haje, Daniela Daufenback Pompeo, Gisela Crippa Furtado, Luciana Monti Lima Rivera

Citation Information : Ramos AL, Haje OA, Pompeo DD, Furtado GC, Rivera LM. Is It Possible to use Cross-sectional and Vertical Facial Measurements to establish the Shape of the Mandibular Arch?. J Contemp Dent Pract 2014; 15 (6):735-739.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-1608

Published Online: 01-12-2014

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2014; The Author(s).


Abstract

Background

Given the benefits of radiographic cephalometric studies in determining patterns of dental-skeletal-facial normality in orthodontics, the aim of this study was to investigate the association between mandibular dental arch shape and cross-sectional and vertical facial measurements.

Materials and methods

It was analyzed plaster casts and teleradiographs in frontal and lateral norm belonging to 50 individuals, aged between 15 and 19 years, with no previous history of orthodontic treatment and falling into four of the six Andrews's occlusion keys. The plaster models were scanned (3D) and the images of the dental arches were classified subjectively as oval, triangular and quadrangular by three calibrated examiners, with moderate inter-examiner agreement (Kappa = 0.50). After evaluation of the method error by paired t test (p > 0.05), it was carried out the analysis of cross-sectional and vertical facial measurements to be compared to the shape of the dental arch. Data were subjected to one-way analysis of variance with a significance level of 5%.

Results

When the VERT index was compared with the three arch shapes, no measurement showed statistically significant differences (p > 0.05): triangular (0.54); oval (0.43); and quadrangular (0.73); as well as there were no differences (p > 0.05) in the widths of the face (141.20; 141.26; 143.27); maxilla (77.27; 77.57; 78.59) and mandible (105.13; 103.96; 104.28).

Conclusion

It can be concluded that there was no correlation between different shapes of the mandibular dental arch and the cross-sectional and vertical facial measurements investigated.

How to cite this article

El Haje OA, Pompeo DD, Furtado GC, Rivera LML, Paranhos LR. Is It Possible to use Cross-sectional and Vertical Facial Measurements to establish the Shape of the Mandibular Arch? J Contemp Dent Pract 2014;15(6):735-739.

PDF Share
  1. Relationship between dental arch dimensions and vertical facial morphology in class I subjects. J Ind Orthod Soc 2012;46(4):316-324.
  2. A new concept of mandibular dental arch forms with normal occlusion. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2008;133(1):10e15-e22.
  3. Comparison of overjet among 3 arch types in normal occlusion. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2011;139(3):e253-260.
  4. Subjetive classification and objective analysis of the mandibular dental-arch form of orthodontic patients. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2011;139(4):e315-321.
  5. Correlation between maxillary central incisor crown morphology and mandibular dental arch form in normal occlusion subjects. Braz Dent J 2012;23(2):149-153.
  6. The dental arch form revisited. Angle Orthod 2001;71(5):386-389.
  7. A morphological study of the relationship between arch dimensions and craniofacial structures in adolescents with class II Division 1 malocclusions and various facial types. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2006;129(3):368-375.
  8. Method to classify dental arch forms. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2011;140(1):87-96.
  9. The relationship of various arch forms and cortical bone thickness. J Dent 2011;8(1):7-11.
  10. The six keys to normal occlusion. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1972;62(3):296-309.
  11. Analisis biomecânico craneo cervical através de uma telerradiografia lateral. Rev Chilena Ortod 1984;1(1):42-52.
  12. Frontal cephalometrics: practical applications, Part I. World J Orthod 2003;4(4):297-316.
  13. The analysis of errors in orthodontic measurements. Am J Orthod 1983;83(5):382-390.
  14. Measuring nominal scale agreement among many raters. Psych Bull 1971;76(5):378-382.
  15. New method for establishing arch form. J Clin Orthod 1978;12(12):843-845.
  16. The fallacy of denture expansion as a treatment procedure. Angle Orthod 1949;19(1):12-22.
  17. Dimensions and form of dental arches in subjects with normal occlusions. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1993;104(1):67-72.
  18. Discriminant factor analysis of dental arch dimensions with 3-dimensional virtual models. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2011;140(5):680-687.
  19. Facial pattern differences in long faced children an adults. Am J Orthod 1984;85(3):217-223.
  20. Correlation of different cephalometric measurements to define facial type. Int J Orthod Milwaukee 2012;23(1):31-37.
  21. Comparison of arch forms between Israeli and North American white populations. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2011;139(3):339-344.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.

We use cookies on this site to enhance your user experience.

By clicking any link on this page you are giving your consent for us to set cookies.