Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Mandibular posterior space in class II division 1 and 2 malocclusion in various age groups

Posteriores Platzangebot im Unterkiefer bei Klasse-II/1- und -II/2-Malokklusion in verschiedenen Altersgruppen

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Journal of Orofacial Orthopedics / Fortschritte der Kieferorthopädie Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

The aim of this study was to compare the mandibular posterior space in subjects with skeletal class II division 1 and division 2 malocclusions in two different age groups.

Methods

Pretreatment cephalometric radiographs of 160 patients from 9 to 13 years of age (n = 80) and 15 to 18 years of age (n = 80) with class II division 1 or division 2 malocclusion were used for the study. Equal numbers of male and female patients (n = 20) were included in the two age groups in each of the malocclusion groups. Eight linear and six angular measurements were taken for mandibular posterior space evaluation. The data obtained from the study were compared using the independent t-test.

Results

In the present study, the mandibular posterior space was greater in both malocclusion groups in subjects aged 15–18 years than in those aged 9–13 years (p < 0.05). The available posterior spaces behind the mandibular first molars were 4.4 mm and 6.3 mm in females (class II divisions 1 and 2, respectively) and 5.3 mm and 7 mm in males (class II divisions 1 and 2, respectively) in the 9‑ to 13-year-old age group. This space increased significantly by 6.9 mm (p < 0.001) and 3.2 mm (p < 0.01) in females (class II division 1 and 2, respectively) and 3.8 mm (p < 0.01) and 3 mm (p < 0.01) in males (class II division 1 and 2, respectively) in the 15- to 18-year-old age group.

Conclusion

Class II division 1 and division 2 malocclusions had similar and inadequate posterior space dimensions for the eruption of the third and an unknown portion of the second molars.

Zusammenfassung

Zielsetzung

Ziel dieser Studie war der Vergleich des posterioren Platzangebotes im Unterkiefer bei Probanden mit skelettaler Klasse II/1 und II/2 - in 2 verschiedenen Altersgruppen.

Methoden

Prätherapeutische kephalometrische Röntgenaufnahmen von 160 Patienten im Alter von 9–13 (n = 80) und 15–18 Jahren (n = 80) mit Malokklusion der Klasse-II/1- bzw. II/2 wurden für die Studie verwendet. In beiden Altersgruppen wurden in jeder der Gruppen die gleiche Anzahl männlicher und weiblicher Patienten (n = 20) eingeschlossen. Acht lineare und 6 Winkelmessungen wurden für die Bewertung des hinteren Unterkieferraums vorgenommen. Die aus der Studie gewonnenen Daten wurden mit dem unabhängigen t‑Test verglichen.

Ergebnisse

In der vorliegenden Studie war der posteriore Unterkieferraum bei Patienten im Alter von 15–18 Jahren in beiden Malokklusionsgruppen größer als bei Patienten im Alter von 9–13 Jahren (p < 0,05). Die verfügbaren posterioren Räume hinter den ersten Molaren betrugen 4,4 und 6,3 mm bei den weiblichen (Klasse-II/1- bzw. -II/2-) und 5,3 und 7 mm bei männlichen (Klasse-II/1- bzw. -II/2-) 9‑ bis 13-jährigen Patienten. Dieser Raum nahm in der Altersgruppe der 15- bis 18-Jährigen signifikant zu: um 6,9 (p < 0,001) und 3,2 mm (p < 0,01) bei den weiblichen (Klasse-II/1- bzw. -II/2-) und um 3,8 (p < 0,01) und 3 mm (p < 0,01) bei den männlichen (Klasse-II/1- bzw. -II/2-) Patienten.

Schlussfolgerung

Patienten mit Klasse-II/1- und -II/2-Malokklusion hatten im Unterkiefer ähnliche, unzureichende Dimensionen für die Eruption des dritten und eines unbekannten Teils des zweiten Molaren.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1 Abb. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Alhaija AES, AlBhairan HM, AlKhateeb SN (2011) Mandibular third molar space in different antero-posterior skeletal patterns. Eur J Orthod 33:570–576

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Baccetti T, Stahl F, McNamara JA Jr (2009) Dentofacial growth changes in subjects with untreated Class II malocclusion from late puberty through young adulthood. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 135:148–154

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Bishara SE (1999) Third molars: a dilemma! Or is it? Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 115:628–633

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Bishara SE, Andreasen G (1983) Third molars: a review. Am J Orthod 83:131–137

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Bjork A (1963) Variations in the growth pattern of the human mandible: longitudinal radiographic study by the implant method. J Dent Res 42:400–411

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Björk A, Jensen E, Palling M (1956) Mandibular growth and third molar impaction. Acta Odontol Scand 14:231–272

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Bondemark L, Tsiopa J (2007) Prevalence of ectopic eruption, impaction, retention and agenesis of the permanent second molar. Angle Orthod 77:773–778

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Breik O, Grubor D (2008) The incidence of mandibular third molar impactions in different skeletal face types. Aust Dent J 53:320–324

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Brezniak N, Arad A, Heller M, Dinbar A, Dinte A, Wasserstein A (2002) Pathognomonic cephalometric characteristics of Angle Class II Division 2 malocclusion. Angle Orthod 72:251–257

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Broadbent BH Sr, Broadbent BH Jr, Golden WH (1975) Bolton standards of dentofacial developmental growth. Mosby, St. Louis

    Google Scholar 

  11. Capelli J Jr (1991) Mandibular growth and third molar impaction in extraction cases. Angle Orthod 61:223–229

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Cassetta M, Altieri F, Di Mambro A, Galluccio G, Barbato E (2013) Impaction of permanent mandibular second molar: a retrospective study. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal 18:564–568

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Chen LL, Xu TM, Jiang JH, Zhang XZ, Lin JX (2010) Longitudinal changes in mandibular arch posterior space in adolescents with normal occlusion. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 137:187–193

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Fekonja A (2013) Comparison of mesiodistal crown dimension and arch width in subjects with and without hypodontia. J Esthet Restor Dent 25:203–210

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Hassel B, Farman AG (1995) Skeletal maturation evaluation using cervical vertebrae. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 107:58–66

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Indira AP, Markande A, David MP (2012) Mandibular ramus: an indicator for sex determination—a digital radiographic study. J Forensic Dent Sci 4:58–62

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Isik F, Nalbantgil D, Sayinsu K, Arun T (2006) A comparative study of cephalometric and arch width characteristics of Class II division 1 and division 2 malocclusions. Eur J Orthod 28:179–183

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Jakovljevic A, Lazic E, Soldatovic I, Nedeljkovic N, Andric M (2015) Radiographic assessment of lower third molar eruption in different anteroposterior skeletal patterns and age-related groups. Angle Orthod 85:577–584

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Keris EY, Bozkaya S, Ozturk M, Gungor K (2016) Prevalence and characteristics of impacted permanent molars in a Turkish subpopulation. J Oral Maxillofac Radiol 4:45–49

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Kim SJ, Choi TH, Baik HS, Park YC, Lee KJ (2014) Mandibular posterior anatomic limit for molar distalization. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 146:190–197

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Lisson JA, Pyka C (2005) Determining skeletal parameters in angle classes II, division 1 and II, division 2. J Orofac Orthop 66:445–454

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Magnusson C, Kjellberg H (2009) Impaction and retention of second molars: diagnosis, treatment and outcome: a retrospective follow-up study. Angle Orthod 79:422–427

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. McNamara JA Jr (1981) Components of class II malocclusion in children 8–10 years of age. Angle Orthod 51:177–202

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Merrifield LL (1996) Differential diagnosis. Semin Orthod 2:241–253

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Palomo JM, Hunt DW Jr, Hans MG, Broadbent BH Jr (2005) A longitudinal 3–dimensional size and shape comparison of untreated class I and class II subjects. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 127:584–591

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Richardson ME (1977) The etiology and prediction of mandibular third molar impaction. Angle Orthod 47:165–172

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Richardson ME (1987) Lower third molar space. Angle Orthod 57:155–161

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Riesmeijer AM, Prahl-Andersen B, Mascarenhas AK, Joo BH, Vig KW (2004) A comparison of craniofacial class I and class II growth patterns. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 125:463–471

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Samatha K, Byahatti SM, Ammanagi RA, Tantradi P, Sarang CK, Shivpuje P (2016) Sex determination by mandibular ramus: a digital orthopantomographic study. J Forensic Dent Sci 8:95–98

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Singh SP, Goyal A (2006) Mesiodistal crown dimensions of the permanent dentition in North Indian children. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent 24:192–196

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Stahl F, Baccetti T, Franchi L, McNamara JA Jr (2008) Longitudinal growth changes in untreated subjects with class II division 1 malocclusion. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 134:125–137

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Vedtofte H, Andreasen JO, Kjaer I (1999) Arrested eruption of the permanent lower second molar. Eur J Orthod 21:31–40

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Orthodontics, Gazi University Faculty of Dentistry, 8 Cd. 82.Sk. No: 4 Emek, Ankara, Turkey

    Erdal Bozkaya, Emine Kaygısız, Tuba Tortop, Yaman Güray & Sema Yüksel

Authors
  1. Erdal Bozkaya
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Emine Kaygısız
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Tuba Tortop
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Yaman Güray
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Sema Yüksel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Erdal Bozkaya.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

E. Bozkaya, E. Kaygısız, T. Tortop, Y. Güray and S. Yüksel declare that they have no competing interests.

Ethical standards

This retrospective study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Gazi University Faculty of Dentistry (21071282-050.99). Signed informed consent was obtained from all subjects or parents.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Bozkaya, E., Kaygısız, E., Tortop, T. et al. Mandibular posterior space in class II division 1 and 2 malocclusion in various age groups. J Orofac Orthop 81, 249–257 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00056-020-00230-w

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00056-020-00230-w

Keywords

Schlüsselwörter

Search

Navigation