Duration of the Pubertal Peak in Skeletal Class I and Class III Subjects

Abstract

Objective: To estimate and compare the duration of the pubertal growth peak in Class I and Class III subjects. Materials and Methods: The data examined consisted of pretreatment lateral cephalometric records of 218 skeletal Class I or Class III subjects (93 female and 125 male subjects) of white ancestry. The duration of the pubertal peak was calculated from the average chronological age intervals between stages CS3 and CS4 of the cervical vertebral maturation in Class I vs Class III groups (t-test). Results: In skeletal Class I subjects, the pubertal peak had a mean duration of 11 months, whereas in Class III subjects it lasted 16 months. The average difference (5 months) was statistically significant (P , .001). Conclusions:The growth interval corresponding to the pubertal growth spurt (CS3-CS4) was longer in Class III subjects than in subjects with normal skeletal relationships; the larger increases in mandibular length during the pubertal peak reported in the literature for Class III subjects may be related to the longer duration of the pubertal peak. (Angle Orthod 2010;80:54-57.)

Stability of rapid maxillary expansion and facemask therapy: A long-term controlled study

“…4,[8][9][10] Second, pubertal growth tends to last longer in Class III subjects compared with Class I subjects. 11 On the other end, long-term observations at the end of active craniofacial growth are available for different orthopedic and orthodontic approaches: chincup therapy, with favorable short-term changes often not maintained at the end of growth, 12 and mandibular cervical headgear, with greater long-term stability of favorable mandibular modifications. 13 The aim of this study was to analyze the long-term outcomes of RME/FM therapy in Class III subjects.…”

“…appears that the immediate posttreatment changes during the pubertal growth spurt (when the mandible has a longer and more intense period of growth in Class III vs Class I subjects 11,27 ) have the greatest unfavorable impact on treatment outcomes in the mandibular and intermaxillary measurements. More evidence it this regard can be derived from the study by Westwood et al 4 Once the pubertal growth spurt is over, the relapse tendency after orthopedic Class III treatment becomes more modest.…”

Sagittal and vertical craniofacial growth and attainment of circumpubertal middle phalanx maturation (MPM) stages: A multiple regression study

“…To date very little research has focused on the possible association between the timing of the circumpubertal skeletal maturation phases and sagittal craniofacial growth. [5][6][7][8][9][10] In this regard, a shorter and longer pubertal growth spurt, as recorded through the ages of attainment of CVM stages 3 and 4, have been reported for untreated skeletal Class II 7,9 and Class III 6,8,9 subjects, respectively. On the contrary, no significant association has been reported between the sagittal craniofacial growth pattern and attainment of the circumpubertal CVM stages 2, 3 and 4.…”

“…All of these previous investigations [5][6][7][8][9][10] used the cervical vertebral maturation (CVM) method 2,11 to assess the attainment of the different circumpubertal skeletal maturation phases. However, the different variants of the method, [12][13][14][15] and the contrasting evidence regarding the reliability of the CVM method in detecting the mandibular growth peak 13,14,[16][17][18] or repeatability 19 would limit the external validity of the method.…”

“…For instance, deficiency 3 and increased 4 mandibular length in skeletal Class II and Class III subjects, respectively, was suggested to be in part a consequence of the different durations of the pubertal growth spurt in these subjects, as compared to that of Class I subjects. [5][6][7][8] However, in spite of the wide indications for orthopedic treatments in case of skeletal malocclusion, only a few studies investigated on possible correlation between craniofacial growth pattern and attainment/duration of the different skeletal maturation phases [5][6][7]9,10 (according to which timing of intervention is based 1,2 ). These studies also reported contrasting evidence with clinically relevant [5][6][7][8][9] or not relevant 10 correlations.…”