{"title":"Correlation between collum angle and lower lip position in different Class II malocclusions - A retrospective cephalometric study","authors":"Prasanna Arvind T.R., A. Felicita","doi":"10.1080/13440241.2021.1924417","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Purpose: Significance of analysing collum angle in class II malocclusions with respect to lip position may lend greater credibility to variable torque brackets (mainly in the anteriors) that are fast gaining traction. Determine the magnitude of collum angle of maxillary central incisors in Class II division 1, division 2 malocclusions and changes in measurement brought about by variations in lower lip position and incisal contact. Materials and methods: 154 lateral cephalograms were divided into three groups- 55(Angle’s class I), 52 (Angle’s class II division 1) and 47 (Angle’s class II division 2). The collum angle was measured along with lower lip line (in Class II division 2) and lower lip contact (in Class II division 1) malocclusions. Results: The mean collum angles were 2.12 ± 1.43°, −0.84 ± 0.87° and 4.67 ± 2.23° in Groups 1, 2, and 3, respectively. Mean collum angle is significantly increased when the lower lip was found to contact the middle-third of the central incisor(in Group 3)and significantly decreased when the anterior one-third of the lower lip was in contact with the incisal edge of the central incisor (in Group 2). ANOVA followed by Tukey HSD test was carried out to determine statistically significant differences (p < 0.05). Conclusion: Collum angle is significantly decreased in Class II division 1 malocclusions necessitating variable torque prescriptions and segmental mechanics of maxillary anteriors. Appropriate alveolar bone support must be assessed prior to en-masse retraction and intrusion respecting the cortical boundaries. KEY MESSAGES: Variable torque brackets are rapidly gaining credence for their ability to provide sufficient alveolar bone support in different clinical scenarios. In this study, we have emphasized upon utilizing similar mechanics to treat class II malocclusions by utilizing the lower lip position as a reference guide.","PeriodicalId":43169,"journal":{"name":"Orthodontic Waves","volume":"80 1","pages":"81 - 86"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2021-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/13440241.2021.1924417","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Orthodontic Waves","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13440241.2021.1924417","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2
Abstract
ABSTRACT Purpose: Significance of analysing collum angle in class II malocclusions with respect to lip position may lend greater credibility to variable torque brackets (mainly in the anteriors) that are fast gaining traction. Determine the magnitude of collum angle of maxillary central incisors in Class II division 1, division 2 malocclusions and changes in measurement brought about by variations in lower lip position and incisal contact. Materials and methods: 154 lateral cephalograms were divided into three groups- 55(Angle’s class I), 52 (Angle’s class II division 1) and 47 (Angle’s class II division 2). The collum angle was measured along with lower lip line (in Class II division 2) and lower lip contact (in Class II division 1) malocclusions. Results: The mean collum angles were 2.12 ± 1.43°, −0.84 ± 0.87° and 4.67 ± 2.23° in Groups 1, 2, and 3, respectively. Mean collum angle is significantly increased when the lower lip was found to contact the middle-third of the central incisor(in Group 3)and significantly decreased when the anterior one-third of the lower lip was in contact with the incisal edge of the central incisor (in Group 2). ANOVA followed by Tukey HSD test was carried out to determine statistically significant differences (p < 0.05). Conclusion: Collum angle is significantly decreased in Class II division 1 malocclusions necessitating variable torque prescriptions and segmental mechanics of maxillary anteriors. Appropriate alveolar bone support must be assessed prior to en-masse retraction and intrusion respecting the cortical boundaries. KEY MESSAGES: Variable torque brackets are rapidly gaining credence for their ability to provide sufficient alveolar bone support in different clinical scenarios. In this study, we have emphasized upon utilizing similar mechanics to treat class II malocclusions by utilizing the lower lip position as a reference guide.
期刊介绍:
Orthodontic Waves is the official publication of the Japanese Orthodontic Society. The aim of this journal is to foster the advancement of orthodontic research and practice. The journal seeks to publish original articles (i) definitive reports of wide interest to the orthodontic community, (ii) Case Reports and (iii) Short Communications. Research papers stand on the scientific basis of orthodontics. Clinical topics covered include all techniques and approaches to treatment planning. All submissions are subject to peer review.