The prevalence of Class III malocclusion varies among different countries and regions. The populations from Southeast Asian countries (Chinese and Malaysian) showed the highest prevalence rate of 15.8%, which can seriously affect oral function, facial appearance, and mental health. As anterior crossbite tends to worsen with growth, early orthodontic treatment can harness growth potential to normalize maxillofacial development or reduce skeletal malformation severity, thereby reducing the difficulty and shortening the treatment cycle of later-stage treatment. This is beneficial for the physical and mental growth of children. Therefore, early orthodontic treatment for Class III malocclusion is particularly important. Determining the optimal timing for early orthodontic treatment requires a comprehensive assessment of clinical manifestations, dental age, and skeletal age, and can lead to better results with less effort. Currently, standardized treatment guidelines for early orthodontic treatment of Class III malocclusion are lacking. This review provides a comprehensive summary of the etiology, clinical manifestations, classification, and early orthodontic techniques for Class III malocclusion, along with systematic discussions on selecting early treatment plans. The purpose of this expert consensus is to standardize clinical practices and improve the treatment outcomes of Class III malocclusion through early orthodontic treatment.
Humans ; Malocclusion, Angle Class III/classification* ; Orthodontics, Corrective/methods* ; Consensus ; Child

We investigated the compensatory trends of mesiodistal angulation of first molars in malocclusion cases. We compared differences in the angulation of first molars in different developmental stages, malocclusion classifications and skeletal patterns. The medical records and lateral cephalogrammes of 1403 malocclusion cases taken before treatment were measured to evaluate compensation of molar angulation in relation to the skeletal jaw. The cases were stratified by age, Angle classification and skeletal patterns. Differences in the mesiodistal angulation of the first molars were compared among the stratifications. We observed three main phenomena. First, angulation of the upper first molar varied significantly with age and tipped most distally in cases aged <12 years and least distally in cases aged >16 years. The lower first molar did not show such differences. Second, in Angle Class II or skeletal Class II cases, the upper first molar was the most distally tipped, the lower first molar was the most mesially tipped, and opposite angulation compensation was observed in Class III cases. Third, in high-angle cases, the upper and lower first molars were the most distally tipped, and opposite angulation compensation was observed in low-angle cases. These data suggest that the angulation of the molars compensated for various growth patterns and malocclusion types. Hence, awareness of molar angulation compensation would help to adjust occlusal relationships, control anchorage and increase the chances of long-term stability.
Adolescent ; Adult ; Age Factors ; Anatomic Landmarks ; pathology ; Cephalometry ; methods ; Child ; Cohort Studies ; Dentition, Mixed ; Female ; Humans ; Male ; Malocclusion ; classification ; pathology ; Malocclusion, Angle Class I ; pathology ; Malocclusion, Angle Class II ; pathology ; Malocclusion, Angle Class III ; pathology ; Mandible ; pathology ; Maxilla ; pathology ; Maxillofacial Development ; physiology ; Middle Aged ; Molar ; pathology ; Palate ; pathology ; Retrospective Studies ; Young Adult

OBJECTIVETo analysis the sum and frequencies of Bolton tooth-size discrepancies Angle Class I, II, III malocclusion patients.

METHODSMeasured each tooth crown mesial-distal size between the first molar of 439 dental plaster casts of malocclusion patients and obtained the sums of six anterior tooth-size and twelve tooth-size between the first molar of upper or lower and calculated the anterior and total tooth-size discrepancies by Bolton rate standards, then statistic analyses were done.

RESULTSPatients whose sums of anterior tooth-size discrepancy were pass 1.5 mm or less than -1.5 mm was 14.02% in Angle Class I malocclusion patients and 9.49% in Class II and 19.32% in Class III. Patients whose sums of total tooth-size discrepancy were pass 1.5 mm or less than -1.5 mm was 19.63% in Angle Class I malocclusion patients and 15.33% in Class II and 20.45% in Class III. The upper sum of anterior tooth-size of Class I malocclusion patients whose sums of anterior tooth-size discrepancies were pass 1.5 mm or less than -1.5 mm was always smaller than normal and the lower sum was always larger. The sums of anterior tooth-size discrepancy of Class I, II, III and total tooth-size discrepancy of Class I were always between 1.5 mm-2.5 mm or -2.5 mm(-)-1.5 mm. Patients whose sums of anterior tooth-size discrepancy were pass 3.5 mm or less than -3.5 mm was 2.34% in Class I malocclusion patients and 0 in class II and 0 in class III. Patients whose sums of total tooth-size discrepancy were pass 3.5 mm or less than -3.5 mm was 4.21% in Class I and 1.46% in Class II and 4.54% in Class III.

CONCLUSIONTooth-size discrepancy of malocclusion patients was not the general cause of malocclusion.

Adolescent ; Adult ; Child ; Dental Arch ; pathology ; Dental Occlusion ; Female ; Humans ; Male ; Malocclusion ; classification ; pathology ; Malocclusion, Angle Class I ; pathology ; Malocclusion, Angle Class II ; pathology ; Malocclusion, Angle Class III ; pathology ; Odontometry ; statistics & numerical data ; Statistics, Nonparametric ; Tooth ; pathology