Lateral skull cephalograms from 50 patients who subsequently had surgical correction of their Class III malocclusion were analysed using a complete linkage cluster analysis based on skull shape. Five subgroups Were identified and are described. All subjects had a degree of mandibular prognathism while only 14 per cent had maxillary retrognathism. An increased lower face height was found in 58 per cent.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BaumrindS. and FrantzR. C. (1971) The reliability of head film measurements. 1. Landmark identification, American Journal of Orthodontics, 60, 111–127.
2.
EidA. A. (1978) Development of orthodontic radiographic analysis by means of computer graphic techniques, Ph.D. Thesis, University of Manchester.
3.
EllisE. and McNamaraJ. A. (1984) Components of adult class III malocclusion, Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, 42, 295–305.
4.
FinkelsteinM., LavelleC. L. B., and HassardT. (1989) The role of cluster analysis on traditional cephalometric dimensions, Angle Orthodontist, 59, 97–105.
5.
GravelyJ. F. and BenziesP. M. (1974) The clinical significance of tracing error in cephalometry, British Journal of Orthodontics, 1, 95–101.
6.
HoustonW. J. B. (1983) The analysis of errors in orthodontic measurements, American Journal of Orthodontics, 5, 382–390.
7.
HubboldR. J. and EidA. A. (1984) A computer graphic approach to lateral skull cephalostat radiograph analysis for orthodontic diagnosis and treatment planning, In: Proceedings of Eurographics ‘84 Conference, Copenhagen, published by North-Holland.
8.
JacobsonA., EvansW. G., PrestonC. G., and SadowskyP. L. (1974) Mandibular prognathism, American Journal of Orthodontics, 66, 140–171.
9.
JohnsonJ. S. (1960) The use of centres of gravity in cephalometric analysis, Dental Practitioner, 10, 107–113.
10.
JohnsonJ. S. (1972) A statistical survey illustrating the uses of mathematical centres in the analysis of the human lateral skull cephalostat radiograph, Ph.D. Thesis, University of London.
11.
JohnsonJ. S. and EidA. A. (1980) Recent developments in diagnosis and treatment planning of anteroposterior jaw discrepancies from the lateral skull cephalostat radiograph, British Journal of Oral Surgery, 17, 256–264.
12.
JonesJ. A. H. (1987) Ccntroid Analysis and Profile Planning, Paper presented to: Joint Spring Meeting of the Scandinavian Association of Oral Surgeons and British Association of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgeons, Halmstad, Sweden.
13.
JonesJ. A. H. and WastellD. G. (1987) Does centroid analysis improve cephalometric diagnosis in the assessment of anteroposterior jaw relationships?Medical Science Research, 15, 1295–1296.
14.
MoyersR. E., RioloM. L., GuireK. E., WainwrightR. L., and BooksteinF. L. (1980) Differential Diagnosis of Class II malocclusions. Part 1. Facial types associated with Class II malocclusions, American Journal of Orthodontics, 78, 477–494.
15.
SanbornR. T. (1955) Differences between the facial skeletal patterns of class III malocclusion and normal occlusion, Angle Orthodontist, 25, 208–222.
16.
TavasA. M. (1976) Group finding analysis of population dentofacial patterns from the lateral skull cephalostat radiograph, Msc. Thesis, University of Manchester
17.
WastellD. G., JohnsonJ. S., JonesJ. A. H., and BennettN. (1988) Orthodontic analysis and treatment planning: a suite of programmes for performing centroid cephalometrics, Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine, 26, 259–265
