Evaluation And Comparison Of Mandibular Asymmetry Indices In Different Classes Of Malocclusion: A Radiographic Study
Evaluation And Comparison Of Mandibular Asymmetry Indices In Different Classes Of Malocclusion
Keywords:
Malocclusion, Condyle, Ramus, Asymmetry indicesAbstract
Objective: To evaluate contribution of condylar and ramal asymmetries in various classes of maloclussion with the use of Orthopantomographs by frontal aspect . Materials and Methods: Panoramic radiographs (PRs) are routinely taken radiographs for the diagnosis purpose. All radiographs were taken by experienced radiology technician on digital panoramic system. The subjects were positioned with the lips in rest position & head oriented to Frankfort horizontal plane as suggested by Azevedo et al. The sample consisted of study five groups including 150 subjects of different types of malocclusions. All the radioghraphic films were traced & measured by the same author and all the asymmetry indices were measured using formula developed by Habets et al. Results: Descriptive statistics and Comparison of Condylar Asymmetry index(CAI), Ramal Asymmetry index(RAI) and Combined Asymmetry index(CoAI) showed that there no statistical significance within RAI (0.216) and CoAI (0.116), but statistically significant values were recorded within CAI (0.0052).We have found more asymmetry in condyle than ramus. Conclusion: Generally for orthodontic treatment orthodontist see mainly skeletal malformation in sagittal plan but from our studies it can be said that it is equally important to look for skeletal asymmetry from frontal aspect, particularly in lower third of the face and condyle. If such asymmetries are diagnosed earlier then it is possible to intervene them with the help of asymmetrical myofunctional appliances. [Manjiri J NJIRM 2016; 7(5):78-81]
References
4. Habets, L. L.; Bezuur, J. N.; Naeiji, M. & Hansson, T. L. The Orthopantomogram, an aid in diagnosis of temporomandibular joint problems. II. The vertical symmetry. J. Oral Rehabil., 15(5):465-71, 1988.
5. Angela Rita Pont.s Azevedo,Guilherme Jansonb,Jose Fernando castanha HenniVuesc, Marcos Roberto de Freitasb. Evaluation of asymmetries between subjects with class II subdivision and apparent facial asymmetry and those with normal occlusion AJO-DO-2006,Vol 129 ,Numba 3.
6. O’Byrn BL. An evalution of mandibular asymmetry in adult with unilateral posterior crossbite .orthop 1995:107:394-400
7. John M. Rose ,DDS,Cynil Saduwsky .BDS.MS, Ellen A Begole .PhD and Randall Moles,mandibular skeletal and dental asymmetry in classII subdivision malocclusions.
AJO-DO Volume 1994: 489-495
8. Miller VJ,Bodner L.Condylar asymmetry measurement in patients with Angle’s classIII Malocclusion. J oral Rehabi, 1997:24:247-249
9. Bezuuz JN, Habets LLMH,Hansson TL. The recognition of craniomandibular disorders; acomparision between clinical, tomographical and dental panoramic radiographical findings in thirty one subjects .J oral Rehabil. 1988;15:549-54.
10. Bezuuz JN, Habets LLMH,Hansson TL. The recognition of craniomandibular disorders;an evaluation of the most reliable signs and J oral rehabil.1989;16:367-372.
11. Kambylatker P. Validityof panoramic radiographs for measurement of mandibular asymmetry Angle orthodontist.2006;76:388-393.
12. Nazimer Jabeen,Mala Ram manohar,Shivprakash,Poorja Naik,Evaluation of asymmetries associated with classll subdivision malocclusion and normal occlusion IOSR Journal of Dental and Medical science,volume 13,issue 1,VG VI(Jan 2014).PP 07-14.
13. Javed Soderwaler,Shebar SE,Silju Mathew.Evaluation of condylar asymmetry in different skeletal patterns in post-adolescents.IJOCK Jan- March 2014:vol 2,issue 3,C-6.
