Importance of vertical dimension and cant of occlusal plane in craniofacial development

Original article

Summary

PURPOSE: In order to examine the relationship between the vertical dimension change and the growth of the maxillo-facial complex in the mixed dentition, we applied a denture frame analysis including the measures of vertical dental and skeletal height, and maxillo-mandibular growth. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The materials used in this study consisted of 225 pair of dental casts in occlusion and serial lateral cephalograms of 25 children. We observed their occlusion and growth in the initial stage (Stage 1), beginning of exchange of the buccal segment (Stage 2), end of exchange of the buccal segment (Stage 3), and final stage (completion of occlusion, Stage 4). RESULTS: Most of the dentition (58%) became Class I molar relation before Stage 2 and almost all of the Class II at Stage 2 remained as Class II occlusion at the final occlusion (Stage 4), indicating rarely available Lee way space for obtaining Class I molar relation. The skeletal Class II group showed a significantly higher eruption of the lower first molar in Stages 2 and 3, while Class III skeletal group showed a significantly higher eruption of upper first molars at Stage 4. There were significant differences of posterior occlusal plane (POP) in different skeletal frames. CONCLUSION: The results suggested that the increase in vertical dimension and inclination of the POP influence the growth of the mandible in obtaining Class I molar relation and that improper vertical dimension and inclination of POP are related to the development of skeletal malocclusions.

Keywords

Vertical dimension Occlusal plane Skeletal frame Growth Lee way space 

References

  1. Arya BS, Savara BS, Thomas DR. Prediction of the first molar occlusion. Am J Orthodont 1973;63:610–21PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bishara SE, Hoppens BJ, Jakobsen JR, et al. Changes in the molar relationship between the deciduous and permanent dentitions: a longitudinal study. Am J Orthod Dentfacial Orthop 1988;93:19–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Foster TD. A textbook of orthodontics. 2nd edn. St Louis: Blackwell Scientific publications, Mosby Book Distribution, 1982Google Scholar
  4. Fushima K, Kitamura Y, Mita H, et al. Significance of the cant of occlusal plane in Class II division 1 malocclusion. Europ J Orthodont 1996;18:27–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Hwang DH, Akimoto S, Sato S. Occlusal plane and mandibular posture in the hyperdivergent type of malocclusion in mixed dentition subjects. Bull Kanagawa Dent Coll 2002;30:87–92Google Scholar
  6. Hwang DH, Akimoto S, Sato S. Relationship between the occlusal plane inclination and mandibular posture in the hyperdivergent type of skeletal frame. Bull Kanagawa Dent Coll 2003;31:39–49Google Scholar
  7. Johannsdottir B, Wisth PJ, Magnusson TE. Prevalence of malocclusion in 6-year-old Icelandic children. A study using plaster models and orthopantomograms. Acta Odont Scand 1997;55:398–402PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Kato S, Chung WN, Kim JI, et al. Morphological characterization of high and low angle types of Class II malocclusion. Bull Kanagawa Dent Coll 2002;30:93–8Google Scholar
  9. Kim YH, Vietas JJ. Anteroposterior Dysplasia Indicator: an adjunct to cephalometric differential diagnosis. Am J Orthodont 1978;73:619–635PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Kim YH. Overbite Depth Indicator with particular reference to anterior open bite. Am J Orthodont 1974;65:586–611PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. McNamara JA Jr. Components of Class II malocclusion in children 8–10 years of age. Angle Orthodont 1981;51:177–202PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Mikhail MG, Rosen H. The validity of temporomandibular joint radiographs using the head positioner. J Prosthet Dent 1979;42:441–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Moyers RE. Handbook of Orthodontics. 3rd edn. Chicago: Year-book Medical Publishers, 1972Google Scholar
  14. Nance HN. The limitations of orthodontic treatment. Part I. Am J Orthodont 1947;33:177–223CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Nance HN. The limitations of orthodontic treatment. Part II. Am J Orthodont 1947;33:253–301CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Owen AH III. Orthodontic/orthopedic treatment of craniomandibular pain dysfunction. Part 2: posterior condylar displacement. J Craniomand Pract 1984;2:334–49Google Scholar
  17. Sato S, Suzuki Y. Relationship between the development of skeletal mesio-occlusion and posterior tooth-to-denture base discrepancy – Its significance in the orthodontic reconstruction of skeletal Class III malocclusion. J Japn Orthod Soc 1988;47:796–810Google Scholar
  18. Sato S. Case report: Developmental characterization of skeletal Class III malocclusion. Angle Orthodontist 1994;64:105–12PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Sato S, Sasaguri K, Kamoi S, et al. Importance of posterior tooth-to-denture base discrepancy in the development of skeletal open-bite malocclusion. (Japanese with English abstract) J Jpn Orthod Soc 1990;49:322–30Google Scholar
  20. Sato S, Motoyanagi K, Suzuki T, et al. Longitudinal study of the denture frame changes and its relationship with the development of skeletal malocclusions. (Japanese with English abstract) J Jpn Orthod Soc 1988;47:186–96Google Scholar
  21. Sato S, Suzuki N, Suzuki Y. Longitudinal study of the cant of the occlusal plane and the denture frame in cases with congenitally missing third molars – Further evidence for the posterior discrepancy. J Jpn Orthod Soc 1988;47:517–25Google Scholar
  22. Sato S, Kim J-II, Kim K-M, et al. Significance of early orthodontic treatment of malocclusion with dysfunction in the craniomandibular system. Bull Kanagawa Dent Coll 2004;32:37–48Google Scholar
  23. Verrela J. Early developmental traits in Class II malocclusion. Acta Odont Scand 1998;56:375–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Wardlow DW, Smith RJ, Hertweck DW, et al. Cephalometrics of anterior open bite: a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. Am J Orthodont Dentofac Orthop 1992;101:234–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Weinberg LA. The role of stress, occlusion, and condyle position in TMJ dysfunction-pain. J Prosthet Dent 1983;49:532–45PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Craniofacial Growth and Development DentistryKanagawa Dental CollegeYokosukaJapan

Personalised recommendations