0 Голоса «за»0 Голоса «против»

Просмотров: 29 стр.saggital

Jul 30, 2018

© © All Rights Reserved

PDF, TXT или читайте онлайн в Scribd

saggital

© All Rights Reserved

Просмотров: 2

saggital

© All Rights Reserved

- Hidden Figures: The American Dream and the Untold Story of the Black Women Mathematicians Who Helped Win the Space Race
- Hidden Figures Young Readers' Edition
- The Law of Explosive Growth: Lesson 20 from The 21 Irrefutable Laws of Leadership
- The E-Myth Revisited: Why Most Small Businesses Don't Work and
- The Wright Brothers
- The Power of Discipline: 7 Ways it Can Change Your Life
- The Other Einstein: A Novel
- The Kiss Quotient: A Novel
- State of Fear
- State of Fear
- The 10X Rule: The Only Difference Between Success and Failure
- Being Wrong: Adventures in the Margin of Error
- Algorithms to Live By: The Computer Science of Human Decisions
- The Black Swan
- Prince Caspian
- The Art of Thinking Clearly
- A Mind for Numbers: How to Excel at Math and Science Even If You Flunked Algebra
- The Last Battle
- The 6th Extinction
- HBR's 10 Must Reads on Strategy (including featured article "What Is Strategy?" by Michael E. Porter)

Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 9

10.5005/jp-journals-10021-1215

Original Article

A Review of Twenty-One Methods

1

Vinay Kumar, 2Shobha Sundareswaran

The anteroposterior discrepancy is usually of utmost concern linear measurements, which have been comprehensively

to patients and parents and hence has received maximum discussed in the literature.9,10 Cranial reference planes such

attention in orthodontics. A number of analyses have been as the Frankfort horizontal and Sella-Nasion line have been

proposed over the years with varying degrees of reliability and used in the determination of jaw dysplasia. Extracranial

success in assessing sagittal jaw relationships. It is absolutely measurements, independent of cranial reference planes or

essential that a clinician be aware of a range of analyses to be

dental occlusion reflecting true sagittal relationship have also

used in different situations. This review provides an insight into

the various cephalometric methods used for evaluation of the been used. The purpose of this review is to discuss various

anteroposterior jaw relationship in chronologic order and their angular and linear geometric parameters for assessment

clinical implications in contemporary orthodontics. of sagittal jaw relationship in chronologic order and their

Keywords: Sagittal dysplasia, Anteroposterior discrepancy, clinical implications in contemporary orthodontics.

Cephalometric analysis.

The Assessment of Anteroposterior

How to cite this article: Kumar V, Sundareswaran S. Dysplasia by Wendell L Wylie

Cephalometric Assessment of Sagittal Dysplasia: A Review

of Twenty-One Methods. J Ind Orthod Soc 2014;48(1):33-41. Wylie11 (1947) was the first to evaluate anteroposterior

Source of support: Nil apical base relationship cephalometrically. He proposed

an analysis where perpendiculars from glenoid fossa,

Conflict of interest: None

sella turcica, pterygomaxillary fissure, buccal groove of

Received on: 25/5/13 maxillary first molar and anterior nasal spine are projected

Accepted after Revision: 20/6/13 to the FH plane and horizontal distances measured and

entered on a form where the standard values are printed.

Introduction Any increase or decrease in patient values are designated as

orthognathic and prognathic respectively. Mandibular length

After the discovery of cephalometrics in 1931, it has been

is assessed by projecting perpendiculars from pogonion and

adapted as an important clinical tool for assessment of jaw

posterior surface of condyle to a tangent drawn to lower

relationship in all three planes–anteroposterior, transverse

border of mandible. Maxillary values below the norm and

and vertical being an integral part of orthodontic treatment

mandibular values above the norm are considered Class III,

planning. The sagittal relationship is usually of utmost

prognathic (positive sign). Vice versa to this situation are

concern to the patient and needs a critical evaluation.

considered Class II, orthognathic (negative sign) (Table 1).

Previously established parameters such as the ANB angle,1

A disadvantage here is that linear measurements are more

Wits analysis,2 AF-BF,3 APDI,4 Beta angle,5 Yen angle,6

prone to errors than angular.

W angle,7 and the recently introduced Pi analysis8 have

been defined and used effectively for the evaluation of Down’s AB Plane Angle and Angle of Convexity

anteroposterior (AP) discrepancies affecting the apical

bases of the jaws. These analyses have both advantages The very next year in 1948, WB Downs12 in his cephalometric

and inaccuracies associated with their use which needs to analysis described the A-B plane angle, as a means to assess

be understood. anteroposterior apical dysplasia. Location of this plane in

relation to facial plane is the measure of the anterior limit

of the denture bases to each other and to the profile. It

1

Resident, 2Professor and Head permits estimation of the difficulty the operator will meet

1,2

Department of Orthodontics, Government Dental College in gaining correct incisal relationships and satisfactory axial

Calicut, Kerala, India inclinations of these teeth. In the control group the relation

Corresponding Author: Shobha Sundareswaran, Professor and of this plane to the facial plane was found to range from 0º

Head, Department of Orthodontics, Government Dental College to a posterior position of B which could be read as –9º. The

Calicut, Kerala, India, e-mail: drshobhakumar@gmail.com

mean was –4.8º (Fig. 1A).

Vinay Kumar, Shobha Sundareswaran

Dimension Standard Patients value Difference

Male Female Orthognathic Prognathic

Glenoid fossa to sella 18 17

Sella to Ptm 18 17

Maxillary length 52 52

Ptm to upper 6 15 16

Mandibular length 103 101

The angle of convexity12 also proposed by Downs reading.2 The length of the cranial base, its inclination and

(Nasion-Point A-Pogonion) is yet another measure of the anterior face height are the other factors affecting ANB. With

protrusion of the face in profile. If Point A fell posterior to advancing age, ANB decreases due to counterclockwise

the facial plane, the angle formed is read in minus degrees, growth rotation of jaws.

and if anterior, in plus degrees. The normal range is +10º Binder19 recognized the geometric effects at work in

to –8.5º (Fig. 1B). the ANB angle. He showed that for every 5 mm of anterior

Being angular measurements, these were more advan displacement of Nasion horizontally, the ANB angle reduces

tageous as it eliminated differences due to absolute size. by 2.5.° A 5 mm upward displacement of Nasion decreases

the ANB angle by 0.5° and 5 mm downward displacement

Angle ANB

increases ANB angle by 1°.

Riedel1 (1952) introduced the ANB angle for evaluating the

anteroposterior relationship of the maxilla to the mandible. Jenkin’s ‘a’ Plane

However, it was Cecil C Steiner13 who popularized this

Jenkins20 in 1955 established the ‘a’ plane, a perpendicular

angle (mean value of 2° in adults and 2.8° in children,

dropped from point A to occlusal plane. Linear distances

range 2-4°) in 1953 in his classic article, ‘Cephalometrics

from ‘a’ plane to point B [+3 mm], Gnathion [+5 mm], and

for you and me’ (Fig. 2A). This has been widely accepted

mandibular incisors [+2 mm] are computed for dysplasia

as the principal method of evaluating anteroposterior jaw

identification.

relationship. Although the ANB angle is still very popular

and useful, it has been demonstrated in the literature14-16 that

Taylor’s AB’ Linear Distance

there is often a difference between the interpretation of this

angle and the actual discrepancy between the apical bases. Taylor15 (1969) introduced new parameter, the linear distance

Several authors10,14,17,18 have shown that the position of between Point A and B’. B’ is the perpendicular from point

nasion is not fixed during growth (nasion grows 1 mm per B to the sella-nasion plane (Fig. 2B). Its mean value was

year), and any displacement of nasion will directly affect 13.2 mm. This study concluded that there was 1 mm of

the ANB angle.14 Furthermore, rotation of the jaws by either change from point A to the perpendicular B’ for each degree

growth or orthodontic treatment can also change the ANB of change in ANB.

34

JIOS

AXD Angle and A-D’ Distance lateral cephalometric head film. The method of assessing

21 the degree or extent of the jaw disharmony entails drawing

To counter the disadvantages of angle ANB, Beatty (1975)

perpendiculars on a lateral cephalometric head film

introduced the AXD angle—the interior angle formed by

tracing from points A and B on the maxilla and mandible,

the intersection of the lines extending from points A and D

respectively, onto the functional occlusal plane denoted

at point X (X is point of intersection of perpendicular from

as AO and BO respectively and measuring the distance

point A to SN plane). Instead of point B, point D is taken as

between them (Fig. 2D). According to Jacobson, in a skeletal

it is center of bony symphysis and not affected by changes in

Class I relationship, in females, AO and BO should coincide

incisor position or chin prominence. Beatty21 also introduced

whereas in males, BO is ahead of AO by 1 mm. Study by

the linear measurement A-D’, the distance from point A

Bishara22 et al showed that Wits appraisal does not change

to line DD’ (Perpendicular from D to sella-nasion plane)

significantly with age.

(Fig. 2C). Mean value for AXD angle and A-D’ distance

was 9.3º and 15.5 mm respectively. Advantage here is that

Limitations of Wits Appraisal

two variables, N and point B are eliminated.

The Wits appraisal avoids the use of nasion and reduces

Wits Appraisal of Jaw Disharmony the rotational effects of jaw growth, but it uses the occlusal

Jacobson2 (1975) in order to overcome the inaccuracies plane, which is a dental parameter,2 to describe the skeletal

of ANB angle devised ‘Wits’ Appraisal (Wits stands for discrepancies. Occlusal plane can be easily affected by

University of the Witswatersrand, Johannesburg, South tooth eruption and dental development as well as by ortho

Africa) which was intended as a diagnostic aid whereby dontic treatment.23-25 This can profoundly influence the Wits

the severity or degree of anteroposterior jaw disharmony appraisal. Furthermore, accurate identification of the occlusal

can be measured, independent of cranial landmarks, on a plane is not always easy or accurately reproducible,26,27

Figs 2A to D: (A) Angle ANB, (B) Taylor’s AB’ distance, (C) AXD angle and AD’ distance, and (D) Wits appraisal

Vinay Kumar, Shobha Sundareswaran

especially in mixed dentition patients or patients with open Freeman14 also proposed a simple method of correc

bite, canted occlusal plane, multiple impactions, missing tion of ANB angle by adjusting or modifying the mea

teeth, skeletal asymmetries, or steep curve of Spee. surements by merely subtracting 1º from the A-N-B

measurement for every 2º that the S-N-A reading exceeds

Anteroposterior Dysplasia Indicator (APDI)

81.5º. Conversely, add 1º to the A-N-B measurement

Kim and Vieta4 (1978), proposed APDI to assess sagittal for every 2º that the S-N-A reading is under 81.5°. This

dysplasia. The APDI reading is obtained by tabulating the modification over-corrects slightly, so with cases that are

facial angle (FH to NPog) ± the A-B plane angle (AB to more than 10º above or below, the total adjustment should

NPog) ± the palatal plane angle (ANS-PNS to FH plane) be reduced by 1º; a 1/2º adjustment may be made for 5º

(Fig. 3A). The mean value of the anteroposterior dysplasia difference if desired.

indicator (APDI) in the normal group was 81.4º, with a

standard deviation of 3.79. Lesser values indicate disto- JYD Angle (1982)

occlusion and greater indicates mesio-occlusion.

Seppo Jarvinen28 proposed JYD angle to measure sagittal

Freeman’s AXB Angle (1981) apical base relationship, formed by the intersection of the

In 1981, Freeman14 described a method eliminating point N, lines extending from points J and D to point Y (Fig. 3C).

so that the degree of divergence of the face does not affect Point J is the center of the cross-section of the anterior body

the readings. A perpendicular is constructed from point A to of the maxilla, and point Y is the point of intersection of the

Frankfort Horizontal, establishing point X. A line from points SN plane and the perpendicular to the SN plane from point

X to B forms angle A-X-B (Fig. 3B). The mean for the A-X-B J. Mean value for this angle is 5.25 ± 1.97º. An advantage

measurement in normal occlusion cases was approximately of this method is that it eliminates use of point A. But, dis-

4º. A variation of this is to draw perpendicular from point A advantage is that it is affected by jaw rotation and vertical

to SN plane (X-point), giving an angle of 6.5°. facial growth.

Figs 3A to C: (A) APDI angle, (B) angle AXB and (C) JYD angle

36

JIOS

Differential (1984)

In 1983, Rocco di Paolo proposed quadrilateral analysis29

based on theorem in Euclidean geometry that determines McNamara30 derived a method for cephalometric evaluation

the direction, extent and location of the skeletal dysplasia from the analysis of Rickett’s and Harvold. This analysis

in millimeter measurement which is more understandable is useful in the diagnosis and treatment planning of the

in surgical orthodontics than angular measurements. The individual patient when the values derived from the tracing

analysis is based on the concept of lower facial proportion of the patient’s initial head film are compared to established

ality which states that in a balanced facial pattern there is a norms from Bolton, Burlington and Ann Arbor samples.

1:1 proportionality that exists between the maxillary base Maxillomandibular differential was calculated by subtracting

length and mandibular base length; also that the average of effective midfacial length from effective mandibular length.

the anterior lower facial height (ALFH) and posterior lower First the effective midfacial length, not the actual anatomic

facial height (PLFH) equals these denture base lengths length of the maxilla, is determined by measuring a line

(Fig. 4A). from condylion (the most posterosuperior point on the

Maxillary length = mandibular length = ALFH + PLFH/2 outline of the mandibular condyle, to point A. Then, the

Clinically, the biggest advantage of quadrilateral analysis effective mandibular length is derived by constructing a

is that it offers an individualized cephalometric diagnosis line from condylion to anatomic gnathion (Fig. 4B). A

(not dependent on established angular or linear norms) on geometric relationship exists between the effective length

patients with or without skeletal dysplasias. Author claims of the midface and that of the mandible. Any given effective

that it is a reliable and accurate method of assessing whether midfacial length corresponds to a given effective mandibular

orthodontic treatment, surgical treatment, or a combination length.30 Ideal maxillomandibular differentials are: small,

of both is required to achieve a satisfactory result.29 20 mm; medium, 25 to 27 mm and large, 30 to 33 mm.

(C) quadrilateral analysis and (D) APP-BPP distance

Vinay Kumar, Shobha Sundareswaran

Figs 5A to C: (A) FABA angle, (B) Beta angle and (C) Yen angle

in determining actual dimensional variations of midface/ Nanda and Merrill31 in 1994, proposed App-Bpp linear

mandible, thus giving the orthodontist an idea as to distance measurement based on claimed advantages of

whether a skeletal Class II or III problem is positional or palatal plane (Fig. 4D). This perpendicular projection of

dimensional. points A and B to palatal plane (App-Bpp) averaged 5.2 ±

2.9 mm in white women with normal occlusions compared

AF-BF Distance (1987) with 4.8 ± 3.6 mm for white men. It increases in Class II

and decreases in Class III.

Chang3 reported a study conducted on 80 young Chinese

The advantage of this analysis is that it is not dependent

and described the AF-BF distance obtained by projecting

on variations of nasion point. The palatal plane is claimed

perpendiculars from points A and B to the FH plane.

to be more stable by the authors.

(Fig. 4C), giving us yet another assessment tool to measure

sagittal jaw dysplasia. The mean value for male was 3.43 FH to AB Plane Angle (FABA)

± 2.93 mm, whereas for female, it was 3.87 ± 2.63 mm. Sang and Suhr32 (1995) proposed FH to AB angle (Fig. 5A)

The AF-BF distance would be positive when point AF was to measure sagittal dysplasia. This study was conducted on

ahead of point BF; and negative if point AF was located 110 Korean children with normal occlusion. Mean value

behind point BF. An extension of this analysis is to draw for this was 80.91 ± 2.53º with range of 10.5º. There was

perpendiculars from N to FH plane and measure distances no statistically significant difference between males and

from points A and B to N vertical. The difference between females. However, from a clinical standpoint, when FABA

the two values should be equal to the AF-BF distance. One was compared with Freeman’s AXB angle14 and AF-BF, it

disadvantage of this method is that it can be affected by shows more sensitivity to the vertical relationship between

inclination of FH plane. points A and B.32

38

JIOS

Beta Angle (2004) the craniofacial complex in the sagittal plane. Authors

5 concluded that for Class I and III malocclusion, overjet

Baik and Ververidou proposed the Beta angle as a new

is not a good predictor of sagittal dysplasia; however, for

measurement for assessing the skeletal discrepancy between

Class II division 1 malocclusion, overjet is a statistically

the maxilla and the mandible in the sagittal plane. It uses

significant predictor.

3 skeletal landmarks—points A, B, and the apparent axis

of the condyle C—to measure an angle that indicates the

Yen Angle (2009)

severity and the type of skeletal dysplasia in the sagittal

dimension (Fig. 5B). Beta angle between 27° and 35° have Neela et al6 reported the Yen angle which was developed

a Class I skeletal pattern; a Beta angle less than 27° indicates in the Department of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Ortho

a Class II skeletal pattern, and a Beta angle greater than 34° paedics, Yenepoya Dental College, Mangalore, Karnataka,

indicates a Class III skeletal pattern. Authors claim that the India, and hence its name. It uses the following three

advantage of Beta angle over ANB and Wits appraisal is that reference points: S, midpoint of the sella turcica; M, mid

(1) it remains relatively stable even if the jaws are rotated point of the premaxilla; and G, center of the largest circle

clockwise or counterclockwise and (2) it can be used in that is tangent to the internal inferior, anterior, and posterior

consecutive comparisons throughout orthodontic treatment surfaces of the mandibular symphysis (Fig. 5C). Mean

because it reflects true changes of the sagittal relationship value of 117 to 123º can be considered a skeletal Class I,

of the jaws, which might be due to growth or orthodontic/ less than 117º for skeletal Class II, and greater than 123º as

orthognathic intervention. a skeletal Class III. The advantage here is that it eliminates

the difficulty in locating points A and B, or the functional

Overjet as Predictor of Sagittal Dysplasia (2008)

occlusal plane used in Wits and condyle axis in Beta angle

Zupancic et al33 reported a study to determine whether any analyses. As it is not influenced by growth changes, it can

correlation exists between overjet value, as measured on be used in mixed dentition as well. But, rotation of jaws can

study casts, and cephalometric parameters, which evaluate mask true sagittal dysplasia here also.

Figs 6A to C: (A) Dentoskeletal overjet, (B) W-angle (C) Pi-angle and Pi-linear

Vinay Kumar, Shobha Sundareswaran

AL-Hammadi34 reported a study conducted on 250 Yemeni Inspite of so many cephalometric sagittal dysplasia

population, to develop a new linear measurement method indicators, angle ANB remains the most widely used one

and named it Dentoskeletal overjet (Fig. 6A). This depends due to its simplicity and global acceptability. However,

on two basic principles; the first is the dentoalveolar total reliability on angle ANB cannot be recommended for

compensation for underlying skeletal base relation; and reasons stated above, and corrections need to be applied

the second is the overjet that remains due to incomplete in specific cases. The Wits appraisal of jaw disharmony

dentoalveolar compensation as a result of large skeletal is also popular. Being a linear parameter dependent on

discrepancy. Mean value of –1 to +2.5 mm, classified as the occlusal plane, again has obvious limitations. The

skeletal Class I, skeletal Class II when this measurement maxillomandibular differential finds a definite place in cases

is more than 2.5 mm, and skeletal Class III when it is less where myofunctional therapy is contemplated as it helps us

than –1 mm. to understand whether a skeletal problem is dimensional.

The quadrilateral analysis being individualized, and not

W-Angle dependent on established norms, would be an excellent tool

in cases with underlying skeletal discrepancies. The Beta

The W angle was developed by Bhad et al.7 The points S, G angle is claimed to reflect true changes in anteroposterior

and M used in Yen angle is utilised here also. Angle between relationship of the jaws. But it can be affected by errors

a perpendicular line from point M to the S-G line and the in locating points A and B, and clockwise rotation of the

M-G line is measured (Fig. 6B). Findings showed that a jaws. Both Yen angle and W angle have eliminated the

patient with a W angle between 51 and 56º has a Class I difficulties in locating points A and B, functional occlusal

skeletal pattern. Patient with a W angle less than 51º has a plane of Wits and condyle axis of Beta angle, thus making it

skeletal Class II pattern and one with a W angle greater than a useful tool in mixed dentition cases also. The most recent

56º has a skeletal Class III pattern. In females with Class III Pi analysis defies ease of application and does not seem to

skeletal pattern, W angle has a mean value of 57.4º, while offer significant advantages.

in males, it is 60.4º and this difference was statistically The best solution would be to apply at least three analyses

significant. The authors claim that W angle reflects true in each individual case. A thorough knowledge of the various

sagittal dysplasia not affected by growth rotations. analyses at hand will help the astute clinician in choosing

the most appropriate ones for each case.

Pi Analysis (2012)

Conclusion

Kumar S et al8 have recently introduced the Pi analysis as a

Literature is replete with attempts to accurately assess antero

new method of assessing the AP jaw relationship. It consists

posterior discrepancy using different cephalometric analyses

of two variables, the Pi-angle and the Pi-linear and utilizes

with varying degrees of success. Rotational effects of jaws,

the skeletal landmarks G and M points to represent the

varying positions of points A and B, nasion, variations in

mandible and maxilla, respectively. M point is the center of

cranial base length, tooth eruption, curve of Spee, etc. seem

the largest circle placed at a tangent to the anterior, superior

to have influenced sagittal assessment leading to the use

and palatal surfaces of the premaxilla. G point is the center

of extracranial reference planes as well. Due to the large

of the largest circle placed at a tangent to internal anterior,

variability in human population, a single cephalometric

inferior and posterior surfaces at the mandibular symphysis.

analysis may not provide an accurate diagnosis. Moreover,

A true horizontal line is drawn perpendicular to the true

cephalometrics is not an exact science and the various

vertical, through nasion. Perpendiculars are projected from

analyses based on angular and linear parameters have obvious

both points to the true horizontal giving the Pi-angle (GG’M)

limitations. Hence, it is imperative that a clinician be aware

and Pi-linear (G’-M’) (Fig. 6C). The mean value for the of a range of cephalometric analyses to be used appropriately

Pi-angle in skeletal Class I, II and III are 3.40 (±2.04), 8.94 as the need arises.

(±3.16) and 23.57 (±1.61) degrees respectively. Mean value

for the Pi-linear (G’–M’) is 3.40 (±2.20), 8.90 (±3.56) and References

23.30 ± (2.30) mm, respectively for Class I, II and III groups.

1. Riedel R. The relation of maxillary structures to cranium in

The highest level of correlation was obtained for Pi-angle malocclusion and in normal occlusion. Angle Orthod 1952;

and Pi-linear (0.96). 22:142-145.

40

JIOS

2. Jacobson A. The ‘Wits’ appraisal of jaw disharmony. Am J Orthod 19. Binder RE. The geometry of cephalometrics. J Clin Orthod

1975;67(2):125-138. 1979;13(4):258-263.

3. Chang HP. Assessment of anteroposterior jaw relationship. Am 20. Jenkins DH. Analysis of orthodontic deformity employing lateral

J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1987;92(2):117-122. cephalostatic radiography. Am J Orthod 1955;41(6):442-452.

4. Kim YH, Vietas JJ. Anteroposterior dysplasia indicator: an 21. Beatty EJ. A modified technique for evaluating apical base

adjunct to cephalometric differential diagnosis. Am J Orthod relationships. Am J Orthod 1975;68(3):303-315.

1978;73(6):619-633. 22. Bishara SE, Fahl JA, Peterson LC. Longitudinal changes in the

5. Baik CY, Ververidou M. A new approach of assessing sagittal ANB angle and Wits appraisal: clinical implications. Am J Orthod

discrepancies: the Beta angle. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1983;84(2):133-139.

2004;126(1):100-105. 23. Richardson M. Measurement of dental base relationship. Eur J

6. Neela PK, Mascarenhas R, Husain A. A new sagittal dysplasia Orthod 1982;4:251-256.

indicator: the Yen angle. World J Orthod 2009;10(2):147-151. 24. Frank S. The occlusal plane: reliability of its cephalometric

7. Bhad WA, Nayak S, Doshi UH. A new approach of assessing location and its changes with growth [thesis]. Oklahoma City:

sagittal dysplasia: the W angle. Eur J Orthod 2013 Feb;35(1): University of Oklahoma; 1983.

66-70. 25. Sherman SL, Woods M, Nanda RS. The longitudinal effects of

8. Kumar S, Valiathan A, Gautam P, Chakravarthy K, Jayaswal P. An growth on the ‘Wits’ appraisal. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop

1988;93:429-436.

evaluation of the Pi analysis in the assessment of anteroposterior

26. Rushton R, Cohen AM, Linney FD. The relationship and

jaw relationship. J Orthod 2012 Dec;39(4):262-269.

reproducibility of angle ANB and the ‘Wits’ appraisal. Br J Orthod

9. Moyers RE, Bookstein FL, Guire KE. The concept of pattern in

1991;18(3):225-231.

craniofacial growth. Am J Orthod 1979;76:136-148.

27. Haynes S, Chau M. The reproducibility and repeatability of

10. Moore WA. Observations on facial growth and its clinical

the Wits analysis. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1995;107:

significance. Am J Orthod 1959;45:399-423.

640-647.

11. Wylie WL. The assessment of anteroposterior dysplasia. Angle

28. Jarvinen S. The JYD angle: a modified method of establishing

Orthod 1947;17:97-109.

sagittal apical base relationship. Eur J Orthod 1982;4(4):243-249.

12. Downs WB. Variations in facial relationships; their significance 29. Di Paolo RJ, Philip C, Maganzini AL, Hirce JD. The quadrilateral

in treatment and prognosis. Am J Orthod 1948;34(10):812-840. analysis: an individualized skeletal assessment. Am J Orthod

13. Steiner CC. Cephalometrics for you and me. Am J Orthod 1983;83(1):19-32.

1953;39(10):729-755. 30. McNamara JA Jr. A method of cephalometric evaluation. Am J

14. Freeman RS. Adjusting A-N-B angles to reflect the effect of Orthod 1984;86(6):449-469.

maxillary position. Angle Orthod 1981;51(2):162-171. 31. Nanda RS, Merrill RM. Cephalometric assessment of sagittal

15. Taylor CM. Changes in the relationship of nasion, point A and relationship between maxilla and mandible. Am J Orthod

point B, and the effect upon ANB. Am J Orthod 1969;56(2): Dentofacial Orthop 1994;105(4):328-344.

143-163. 32. Yang SD, Suhr CH. F-H to AB plane angle (FABA) for

16. Hussels W, Nanda RS. Analysis of factors affecting angle ANB. assessment of anteroposterior jaw relationships. Angle Orthod

Am J Orthod 1984;85(5):411-423. 1995;65(3):223-231.

17. Enlow DH. A morphogenetic analysis of facial growth. Am J 33. Zupancic S, Pohar M, Farcnik F, MO. Overjet as a predictor of

Orthod 1966;52:283-299. sagittal skeletal relationships. Eur J Orthod 2008;30(3):269-273.

18. Nanda RS. The rates of growth of several facial components 34. AL-hammadi. Dentoskeletal overjet: a new method for

measured from serial cephalometric roentgenograms. Am J assessment of sagittal jaw relation. Australian Journal of Basic

Orthod 1955;41:658-673. and Applied Sciences 2011;5(9):1830-1836.

- Openbite Treatment With Clear AlignersЗагружено:Jovia Chitrayanti
- Age Changes in Oral and Dental Tissues_new1Загружено:godsyears
- Gingival Periodontal IndexЗагружено:xodia_04
- British Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery 45-1-83 84 Buccal Corticotomy for Removal of Deeply Impacted Mandibular Molars TayЗагружено:Gonzalo Barrientos
- Temporal FossaЗагружено:وجيه الوجيه
- Flyer Bandung Dentistry 2019Загружено:linda fitriyani
- Excellence in Loops - Some ReflectionsЗагружено:Kanish Aggarwal
- Begg SeminarЗагружено:Parijat Chakraborty PJ
- insurance loanЗагружено:shamas
- Management of Broken Files a Clinical ApproachЗагружено:Mariana Cornei
- Natural Head Posture / orthodontic courses by Indian dental academyЗагружено:indian dental academy
- 2007_131_3_334_342_MoateЗагружено:Neycer Catpo Nuncevay
- 2016 - Comparison of the Cleaning Effectiveness of Mtwo & NextЗагружено:muchlis fauzi
- jurnalЗагружено:bigtresna
- Pi is 0889540611000370Загружено:ucsurortodoncia
- 012616-69%2E1.pdfЗагружено:Ella Golik
- 29495050 Technical Quality of Root Canal Treatment and Detection of Iatrogenic Errors in an UndergraduateЗагружено:Harry Ardiyanto
- JD5Загружено:Nishad NT
- Articulo 1Загружено:katherine
- April_2019_1554208094_0727342-1.pdfЗагружено:amil sharma
- The Bachelor of Dental Surgery Prepares Students for PatientЗагружено:Amrutha Dasari
- a11v17n4 (1)Загружено:misapopov
- prenatalandpostnatalgrowthofmandible-140127014116-phpapp02Загружено:HAMID
- Oral and Dental TraumaЗагружено:Alex Burde
- Posicion de La Lengua Ingles-convertidoЗагружено:Elias Cleves
- 432108Загружено:Shraddha Agarwal
- 10.1670@18-042Загружено:Anonymous bZAo27
- Management of Intrusive Luxation InjuriesЗагружено:Florin Ionescu
- ReiszЗагружено:Tania Rodriguez
- 23aЗагружено:Egi

- 301Загружено:Kanish Aggarwal
- 33-4-424Загружено:Kanish Aggarwal
- Revision TestЗагружено:Kanish Aggarwal
- Pi is 0096634743901589Загружено:Kanish Aggarwal
- Ijss Feb Ra01Загружено:Kanish Aggarwal
- jjjjjjjЗагружено:Kanish Aggarwal
- EXTRAORAL RADIOGRAHYЗагружено:Kanish Aggarwal
- iaat14i9p338Загружено:Kanish Aggarwal
- Press ReleaseЗагружено:Kanish Aggarwal
- 0003-3219%282004%29074_0508%3Ateopeo_2.0.co%3B2Загружено:Kanish Aggarwal
- nullЗагружено:api-26468957
- 1-s2.0-S088954069780025X-mainЗагружено:Kanish Aggarwal
- Current Oral Hygiene Protocol PerformaЗагружено:Kanish Aggarwal
- Case Update – Kanish Aggarwal – 12Загружено:Kanish Aggarwal
- hhhfgЗагружено:Kanish Aggarwal
- annexure1 nkhklЗагружено:Kanish Aggarwal
- Thesis TablemmЗагружено:Kanish Aggarwal
- Pi is 0889540615006575Загружено:Kanish Aggarwal
- Excellence in Loops - Some ReflectionsЗагружено:Kanish Aggarwal
- 96.fullЗагружено:Kanish Aggarwal
- Paper App FormЗагружено:Kanish Aggarwal
- Modified Fluid Wax Impression for a Severely Resorbed Edentulous Mandibular RidgeЗагружено:Chepe Lemus
- Supplier Setup Request Form TNBT_KanishЗагружено:Kanish Aggarwal
- A Customized Appliance for Molar Uprighting and Space Regaining - JCO-OnLINEЗагружено:Kanish Aggarwal
- Publicatio AssessmentЗагружено:Kanish Aggarwal
- Pg Academic Details OrthodonticsЗагружено:Kanish Aggarwal
- The HBN Angle _Harsh Bhagvatiprasad Dave, Vikas Gill, Divyaroop Rai, Y N N Reddy, Journal of Indian Orthodontic SocietyЗагружено:Kanish Aggarwal
- 072914-530%2E1Загружено:Kanish Aggarwal
- s40510-015-0090-0Загружено:Kanish Aggarwal

- Toothpaste.pdfЗагружено:Jrar Yap
- Iotn Ruler Made EasyЗагружено:Zahid Ahmad
- qdt-2012-prov.pdfЗагружено:Vania Sánchez
- colgate.docxЗагружено:Ana Soltan
- Non Vital Pulp TherapyЗагружено:Amit Gaur
- Prevalence of Malocclusion Among School Children in Bangalore IndiaЗагружено:amalia rieska mauliddya
- DENT 202 Course Syllabus.docЗагружено:velangni
- Diagnosis in fpdЗагружено:Keerthi Palagiri
- 2005 Br Dent J- Anterior Dental Aesthetics- Dental PerspectiveЗагружено:Lucero Salvatierra Briones
- Diagnosis and Treatment Planning in FPDЗагружено:aziz2007
- PERIMPLANTITIS.pdfЗагружено:Urjita Patil
- StraumannЗагружено:Jean-Christophe Pope
- Advanced probing techniques.pdfЗагружено:Carlos Silva
- (Ortho) Multiple Diastem in Midline Because of MesiodensЗагружено:Bintang Ayu
- ijoi_vol_38Загружено:mardo79
- Colon 2014Загружено:sulistiya
- Speech Comprehension (Prosthetic contemplation)Загружено:IOSRjournal
- Development of OcclusionЗагружено:Ashis Biswas
- At Oz Orthodontics Vol 3 Mal OcclusionЗагружено:gentiana
- Aligner Therapy x Edgewise BracesЗагружено:mutans
- TorqueЗагружено:Rohit Sharma
- Mechanical Plaque Control PedoЗагружено:velangni
- Growth RoataionЗагружено:dr_nilofervevai2360
- DeffinationЗагружено:drkar9
- Guided EndoЗагружено:Elija Brock
- american dental board of prostodontics 2008Загружено:Roberto Puc
- Jurnal Endo Surgery (Apeksifikasi) SamuelЗагружено:Aliza Husnul Farida
- Protocol Acs 2016 0Загружено:Anup Lal Rajbahak
- 835699_634334088876492500Загружено:Ammar Al Zoubi
- 14.Cl2 amal.principles2.08.pdfЗагружено:Naji Z. Arandi

## Гораздо больше, чем просто документы.

Откройте для себя все, что может предложить Scribd, включая книги и аудиокниги от крупных издательств.

Отменить можно в любой момент.