Assessment of Sagittal Skeletal Discrepancy: A Cephalometric Study

Bhardwaj, Preeti; Kapoor, Dipti; Rani, M S

doi:10.1177/0974909820130506s

Cited by 4 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In our study the Skeletal Class I group shows that ANB Angle had significant moderate positive correlation with Pi Angle(r=0.411**). This result is in accordance with the study by Jain et al [16] and in contrast with the study by Kumar et al [12] while ANB Angle had significant moderate negative correlation with Beta Angle (r=-0.351**) which was supported by Bhardwaj et al, [17] Sharma et al, [18] Kapadia et al, [19] and ANB had non significant weak negative correlation with Yen Angle (r=-0.197) which is in accordance with the findings by Mittal et al, [14] Jain et al, [16] and W Angle (r=-0.199) Sharma et al, [18] Kapadia et al [19] . (Table -2)…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

“…In Skeletal Class I group it was found that Wits Appraisal had significant moderate negative correlation with Beta Angle(r=-0.351**) which is supported with study done by Bhardwaj et al, [17] Sharma et al, [18] Kapadia et al [19] and had significant moderate positive correlation with Pi Angle (r=0.338**) which is in accordance with results of Jain et al [16] and in contrast with the study conducted by Kumar et al [12] (Table -2) In Skeletal Class II group Wits had a significant strong negative correlation with Beta Angle. (r=-0.599**) which is in accordance with the study by Bhardwaj et al, [17] Sharma et al, [18] Kapadia et al [19] and non significant weak but positive correlation with Pi Angle (r=0.203) which favours the results of studies done by Jain et al [16] and Kumar et al [12] (Table -3) Beta Angle was introduced by Chong Yol Baik and Marie Ververidou. [10] They uses 3 Skeletal landmarks i.e Points A , Point B and apparent axis of condyle (Point C).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 84%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Comparative Assessment of Sagittal Jaw Discrepancies by Various Cephalometric Parameters in Skeletal Class I and Class II Malocclusion among Bhopal Population: A Cephalometric Study

Dubey,

Kallury,

Balani

et al. 2023

JCO

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim-Purpose of this study is to compare the validity of different cephalometric angles like Beta, Yen, Pi and W angle for evaluating sagittal jaw dysplasia in Skeletal Class I and Class II malocclusion among Bhopal population and to obtain most reliable parameter for orthodontic diagnosis. Material and Method-120 pretreatment lateral cephalograms were selected on the basis of inclusion criteria and were divided into 2 groups (n= 60) i.e. Skeletal Class I and II on the basis of ANB Angle and Wits Appraisal between ages of 16-35 years which further subdivided into Male and Female (n=30). Landmarks were located, traced and analyzed. Results-There was statistically highly significant difference found for cephalometric parameters in Skeletal Class I and Class II Malocclusion. (p=0.001) Mean value of ANB angle was 1.917±1.37 and 6.292±1.27, Wits was -0.742±3.02 and 3.442±2, Beta angle was 31.692±4.41 and 24.125±5.60, Yen angle was 123.28±3.47 and 117.16±4.47, Pi angle was -0.658±3.37 and 4.817±3.14 and W angle was 55.792±2.61 and 52.017±3.34 among Skeletal Class I and II groups respectively. Yen angle (91.67 % & 76.67 % ) and Pi angle (90.00 % & 71.67 % ) had high sensitivity and specificity to discriminate between Class I & II. Cut off value was ≤ 3for Pi and >119 for Yen angle. Conclusion-Yen Angle is the most accurate and reliable parameter to differentiate between Skeletal Class I and Class II Groups with highest sensitivity and specificity followed by Pi Angle.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 84%

Comparative Assessment of Sagittal Jaw Discrepancies by Various Cephalometric Parameters in Skeletal Class I and Class II Malocclusion among Bhopal Population: A Cephalometric Study

Dubey,

Kallury,

Balani

et al. 2023

JCO

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Jika klinisi perlu mendiagnosis rahang mana yang memiliki pertumbuhan abnormal atau apakah kelainan tersebut disebabkan oleh pertumbuhan kedua rahang, diperlukan data sefalometri lebih lanjut. 20 Sefalometri, yaitu radiografi dan analisis sefalometri dianggap sebagai bagian dari gold standard untuk diagnosis pada awal perawatan ortodonti. Dental cast, foto intra dan ekstra oral, dan radiografi panoramik dan sefalomemetri disarankan untuk digunakan secara rutin untuk perencanaan perawatan ortodonti.…”

Section: Tinjauan Pustakaunclassified

Mistakes in orthodontic treatment

Pawinru,

Habar,

Wahyuni

2023

MDJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Public awareness of the importance of orthodontic treatment to correct malocclusion is increasing. Orthodontic treatment like any other medical treatment can pose a risk to the patient, due to errors that occur during treatment. This literature review aimed to determine the errors that can occur during orthodontic treatment and the risks they can pose to patients. Scientific information relevant to the study topic was collected and synthesized into an article. In general, errors can originate from orthodontic treat-ment, including the type of appliance used, the direction and amount of force applied, the skill of the clinician and the length of treatment. Errors can also originate from the patient, namely biological and behavioral factors of the patient. It is concluded that orthodontic treatment errors and patient factors can cause risks to patients during orthodontic treatment, namely periodontal da-mage, pain, root resorption, tooth devitalization, temporomandibular joint disorders, caries, and enamel damage. A good under-standing of treatment procedures, diagnosis and patient informed consent is needed in order to minimize the risks of orthodon-tic treatment that can occur in patients.

show abstract

“…This method Original research 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-2328 depends on points A and B, which are hard to place, and point C in condyle, which is not evidently noticeable either to overcome these problems. Beta angle makes use of three skeletal landmarks points A, B, and evident axis of the condyle-point C. 7 Hence, this study was planned to compare beta and ANB angle for the assessment of sagittal skeletal discrepancy.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%