Assessment of the Mandibular Asymmetry in Class II Subdivision cases from a Sample Pakistani Population

  • Erum Behroz Khan Jinnah Sindh Medical University
  • Tariq Rafi, Professor Jinnah Sindh Medical University
  • Sanam Tauheed, Dr Jinnah Medical and Dental College
  • Ali Raza Jafri, Dr Akhtar Saeed Medical & Dental College
  • Nisar Ali, Dr Jinnah Postgraduate Medical Centre
Keywords: Asymmetry, Class II Subdivision, Malocclusion

Abstract

Objectives:

To determine the asymmetry of Mandibular condyle and ramus in a group of patients with Class II subdivision malocclusion

To evaluate the difference in the prevalence of Class II subdivision malocclusion on either side of the mandible

 

Methodology

This was a cross-sectional (comparative) study carried out for six months from 20th September 2015 to 20th March 2016 at the Department of Orthodontics, Sindh Institute of Oral Health Sciences, Jinnah Sindh Medical University.

History, Clinical examination, intraoral photographs and plaster models were used to classify the patients according to their malocclusion. Orthopantomogram (OPG) that are routinely taken for orthodontic patients’ records were used for this study. Andcondyle, ascending ramus and both sides of the corpus were traced. The condylar height, ramal height, and gonial angles were measured and the asymmetry index computed.

Results:

A total of 80 patients (34 males and 46 females) were taken in the age range of 12-26 years. There were no statistically significant differences found for male and female subjects compared. Class I and Class II subdivision groups were computed for the heights of Condylar process, Ramus and Gonial angles were measured followed by asymmetry index calculation in both groups, among the values statistically significant differences were found for condylar height (p=0.021), ramal height (p<0.001), condylar height index (p<0.001) and ramal height index (p=0.014) whereas, values including gonial angle, condylar height plus ramal height and Condylar height plus ramal height index values were statistically insignificant. The results showed for Class I group longer values of gonial angle, ramal height and condylar-plus-ramal height measurements.

Conclusion:

Class II subdivision patients have significant differences for the Ramal height, Condylar height, Condylar height index and Ramal height index, when compared to normal occlusion sample.

References

Sezgin OS, Celenk P, Selim A. Mandibular asymmetry

in different occlusion patterns. Angle Orthod. 2007;

(5):803-7

W.R. Proffit and T.A. Turvey.Dentofacial asymmetry,

Contemporary Treatment of Dentofacial Deformity, ed.

W.R. Proffit, and R.P. White, D.M. Sarver. Mosby

Angle EH. Classification of malocclusion. Dental

Cosmos.1899;41: 248–264

Alavi DG, BeGole EA, Schneider BJ. Facial and dental

arch asymmetries in Class II subdivision malocclusion.

Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1988; 93(1):38-46

Kurt G, Uysal T, Sisman Y, Ramoglu SI. Mandibular

asymmetry in Class II Subdivision malocclusion. Angle

Orthod.2008;78(1):32-7 doi:10.2319/021507-73.1

Janson G, de Lima KJ, Woodside DG, Metaxas A, de

Freitas MR and Henrigues JF. Class II subdivision

malocclusion types. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop.

; 131(1):57-66

Azevedo AR, Janson G, Henrigues JF and freitas MR.

Evaluation of asymmetries between subjects with Class

II subdivision and apparent facial asymmetry and those

with normal occlusion. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop.

; 129(3):376-83

Rose MJ, Sadowsky C, BeGole EA, Moles R.

Mandibular skeletal and dental asymmetry in Class II

subdivision malocclusions. Am J Orthod Dentofacial

Orthop. 1994;105(5):489-95

Sanders DA, Rigali PH, Neace WP, Flavio U and Nanda

R. Skeletal and dental asymmetries in Class II

subdivision malocclusions using cone-beam computed

tomography. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2010;

:542-3

Ann Jinnah Sindh Med Uni 2019; 5(2):

Kambylafkas P, Murdock E, Gilda E. Tallents RH,

Kyrkanides S. Validity of Panoramic Radiographs for

Measuring Mandibular Asymmetry. Angle Orthod.

;76(3):388-93

Habets LL, Bezuur JN, Naeiji M, Hansson TL. The

Orthopantomogram, an aid in diagnosis of

temporomandibular joint problems. II. The vertical

symmetry. J Oral Rehabil. 1988;15(5):465–471

Saglam AM. The condylar asymmetry measurements

in different skeletal patterns. J Oral Rehabil. 2003;

(7):738–742

Kiki A, Kilic N, Oktay H. Condylar asymmetry in

bilateral posterior crossbite patients. Angle Orthod.

;77(1):77–81

Sezgin OS, Celenk P, Arici S. Mandibular asymmetry

in different occlusion patterns. Angle Orthod. 2007;

(5):803–807

Arnold TG, Anderson GC, Lilyemark WF. Assessment

of craniofacial asymmetry with S-V radiographs. Am

J Orthod Dentofacial Ortho.1994;106(3):250-6

Melnik AK. A cephalometric study of mandibular

asymmetry in a longitudinally followed sample of

growing children. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop.

;101(4):355-66

Alavi DG, Begole EA, Schneider BJ. Facial and dental

arch asymmetries in Class II subdivision malocclusion.

Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1988; 93(1):38-46

Habets LL, Bezuur JN, Van Ooij CP, Hansson TL. The

Orthopantomogram, an aid in diagnosis of

temporomandibular joint problems. I. The factor of

vertical magnification. J Oral Rehabil. 1987; 14(5):

–480

Raustia AM, Salonen MA. Gonial angles and ramus

height of the mandible in complete denture wearer—

a panoramic -radiographic study. J Oral Rehabil.1997;

(7):512–516

Bezuur JN, Habets LL, Hansson TL. The recognition

of craniomandibular disorders; condylar symmetry in

relation to myogenous and arthrogenous origin of pain.

J Oral Rehabil.1989; 16(3):257–260

Rose JM, Sadowsky C, Begole EA, Moles R.

Mandibular skeletal and dental asymmetry in class II

subdivision malocclusions. Am J Orthod Dentofacial

Orthop. 1994;105(5): 489–495

Kambylafkas P, Kyrkanides S, Tallents RH. Mandibular

asymmetry in adult patients with unilateral degenerative

joint disease. Angle Orthod. 2005; 75:305–310

Vitral RW, Telles CS. Computed tomography evaluation

of temporomandibular joint alterations in class II division

subdivision patients: condylar symmetry. Am J Orthod

Dentofacial Orthop.2002;121(4):369–375

Westesson PL, Tallents RH, Katzberg RW, Guay JA.

Radiographic assessment of asymmetry of the mandible.

Am J Neuroradiol.1994;15:991–999

Forsberg CT, Burstone CJ, Hanley KJ. Diagnosis and

treatment planning of skeletal asymmetry with the

submentalvertical radiograph. Am J Orthod.1984; 85:

–237

Janson RP, Metaxas A, Woodside DG, de Freitas MR,

Pinzan A.Three-dimensional evaluation of skeletal and

dental asymmetries in Class II subdivision

malocclusions. Am J Orthod. 2001; 119(4):406-18

Published
2020-02-24