A comparative study about the position of upper and lower jaws, and first molars in normal occlusion and Angle's Class I,II,III malocclusions.
- Author:
Byoung Mo YUN
1
;
Byoung Keun AHN
;
Geon Ju RHEE
;
Sun Hae KIM
;
Young Ju PARK
;
Ho Jin HAN
Author Information
1. Department of Dentistry, College of Medicine, Hallym University, Korea.
- Publication Type:Comparative Study ; Original Article
- Keywords:
Angle classification jaw position molar position malocclusion cephalometry
- MeSH:
Jaw*;
Malocclusion*;
Mandible;
Maxilla;
Molar*;
Skull;
Skull Base
- From:Korean Journal of Orthodontics
1993;23(4):633-644
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
There has been so much controversies about the position of upper and lower jaws, and their first permanent molars in normal occlusion and Angle's class I,II,III malocclusions. So, the purpose of this study is to compare the position of upper and lower jaws, and their first molars in normal occlusion and Angle's class IIIIII malocclusions by lateral cephalometric analysis. The sample consisted of one hundred and twenty girls(thirty in each group) who had completed growth. The findings of this study were as follows: 1. In class I malocclusion, both maxilla and mandible were slightly posterior position than normal occlusion, but they showed harmonious relationship. 2. In class II malocclusion, the mandible was greatly retruded, and the maxilla was also slightly retruded to the cranial base as compared with normal occlusion. 3. In class III malocclusion, the maxilla was significantly retruded to the cranial base, but no significant difference was found in mandibular position as compared with normal occlusion. 4. The maxillary first molar was located at posterior position in class II malocclusion, and anterior position in class III malocclusion to the cranium, so that the rotation of mandible was influenced by that. 5. The mandibular first molar showed constant relationship to the mandible in all four groups, but different position to the cranial base in direct proportion to the mandibular position. 6. On the treatment planning of class II malocclusion, it seems to be better to promote the mandibular horizontal growth by inhibiting the vertical growth of maxillary molar area, and on the treatment planning of class III malocclusion, it seems to be better to promote the antero-inferior growth of maxilla and to promote the mandibular vertical growth by inducing the vertical growth of maxillary molar area.
