Limits...
Cephalometric study to test the reliability of anteroposterior skeletal discrepancy indicators using the twin block appliance.

Trivedi R, Bhattacharya A, Mehta F, Patel D, Parekh H, Gandhi V - Prog Orthod (2015)

Bottom Line: All the parameters considered in our study showed highly significant difference in pre-treatment and post-functional values, suggesting their reliability (p < 0.0001).When ANB angle was compared with the other angular parameters, a highly significant change in the mean value of the difference in pre-treatment (T1) and post-functional (T2) values was noted (p < 0.001).No significant change was seen when comparing the mean value of the difference in T1 and T2 between linear parameters (p = 0.949).

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

ABSTRACT

Background: The objectives of this study were to check the reliability of the five angular and two linear parameters for sagittal maxillo-mandibular discrepancy and to compare and correlate angular parameters with the ANB angle, and the linear parameter with Wits analysis.

Methods: The pre-treatment and post-functional lateral cephalograms of 25 subjects (17 males, 8 females) with class II division 1 malocclusion treated with twin block functional appliance were selected. Five angular (ANB, β angle, APDI, YEN angle, W angle) and two linear (Wits analysis, App-Bpp) parameters were traced on both sets of cephalograms. Paired Student's t-test, one-way ANOVA, post hoc test, and Karl Pearson correlation statistical analysis were performed.

Results: All the parameters considered in our study showed highly significant difference in pre-treatment and post-functional values, suggesting their reliability (p < 0.0001). When ANB angle was compared with the other angular parameters, a highly significant change in the mean value of the difference in pre-treatment (T1) and post-functional (T2) values was noted (p < 0.001). No significant change was seen when comparing the mean value of the difference in T1 and T2 between linear parameters (p = 0.949).

Conclusions: All the parameters used in the study can be reliably used to assess anteroposterior skeletal discrepancy. Whenever limitations of the ANB angle and Wits analysis are foreseen, the W angle and App-Bpp, respectively, can be reliably used. The YEN angle may reliably predict the post-functional change with the use of twin block appliance.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Angular parameter ANB.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4385035&req=5

Fig1: Angular parameter ANB.

Mentions: Short description of various parameters used in the study


Cephalometric study to test the reliability of anteroposterior skeletal discrepancy indicators using the twin block appliance.

Trivedi R, Bhattacharya A, Mehta F, Patel D, Parekh H, Gandhi V - Prog Orthod (2015)

Angular parameter ANB.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4385035&req=5

Fig1: Angular parameter ANB.
Mentions: Short description of various parameters used in the study

Bottom Line: All the parameters considered in our study showed highly significant difference in pre-treatment and post-functional values, suggesting their reliability (p < 0.0001).When ANB angle was compared with the other angular parameters, a highly significant change in the mean value of the difference in pre-treatment (T1) and post-functional (T2) values was noted (p < 0.001).No significant change was seen when comparing the mean value of the difference in T1 and T2 between linear parameters (p = 0.949).

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

ABSTRACT

Background: The objectives of this study were to check the reliability of the five angular and two linear parameters for sagittal maxillo-mandibular discrepancy and to compare and correlate angular parameters with the ANB angle, and the linear parameter with Wits analysis.

Methods: The pre-treatment and post-functional lateral cephalograms of 25 subjects (17 males, 8 females) with class II division 1 malocclusion treated with twin block functional appliance were selected. Five angular (ANB, β angle, APDI, YEN angle, W angle) and two linear (Wits analysis, App-Bpp) parameters were traced on both sets of cephalograms. Paired Student's t-test, one-way ANOVA, post hoc test, and Karl Pearson correlation statistical analysis were performed.

Results: All the parameters considered in our study showed highly significant difference in pre-treatment and post-functional values, suggesting their reliability (p < 0.0001). When ANB angle was compared with the other angular parameters, a highly significant change in the mean value of the difference in pre-treatment (T1) and post-functional (T2) values was noted (p < 0.001). No significant change was seen when comparing the mean value of the difference in T1 and T2 between linear parameters (p = 0.949).

Conclusions: All the parameters used in the study can be reliably used to assess anteroposterior skeletal discrepancy. Whenever limitations of the ANB angle and Wits analysis are foreseen, the W angle and App-Bpp, respectively, can be reliably used. The YEN angle may reliably predict the post-functional change with the use of twin block appliance.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus