J Korean Assoc Oral Maxillofac Surg.  2024 Oct;50(5):265-272. 10.5125/jkaoms.2024.50.5.265.

Quantum of incisal compensation in skeletal class III malocclusion: a cross-sectional study

• Chunduru R
• Kailasam V
• Ananthanarayanan V

• KMID: 2560822
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.5125/jkaoms.2024.50.5.265

Abstract

Objectives
Skeletal class III malocclusion presents either with maxillary retrognathism, mandibular excess, or a combination. Dentoalveolar compensations occur with maxillary incisor proclination and mandibular incisor retroclination. The aim of this study is to quantify the amount of incisal compensation in class III skeletal malocclusion and correlate it to the severity of the skeletal base.
Materials and Methods
Eleven angular and 7 linear cephalometric measurements were digitized from 57 patients. Axial inclination of the upper and lower incisors was evaluated for compensation. Pearson’s correlation coefficient was used to determine the dentoalveolar parameter among those measuring upper and lower incisor position and inclination that correlated most highly with the severity of class III. Linear regression analysis was used to identify the quantum of the incisal compensation.
Results
Upper incisors were proclined and placed anteriorly. However, correlation analysis suggested a less responsive incisor with progressive change in skeletal base. Lower incisors began to compensate only as the severity of class III increased. For every degree of reduction of ANB angle from normal, the incisor mandibular plane angle (IMPA) and L1-GoMe decreased by 0.79° and the L1-GoGn decreased by 0.81°.
Conclusion
The upper incisors contributed more to compensation compared to the lower incisors in a class III skeletal base. As class III severity increased, the upper incisor compensation decreased while that of lower incisors increased. For every degree of reduction in ANB angle, the IMPA and L1-GoMe decreased by 0.79° and the L1-GoGn decreased by 0.81°.

Keyword

Malocclusion; Angle class III; Compensation; Regression analysis

Figure

• 

  Fig. 1 Digital tracing using Dolphin Imaging software (ver. 11.0; Dolphin Imaging and Management Solutions).

• 

  Fig. 2 Scatter plot between IMPA and severity of class III. (IMPA: incisor mandibular plane angle)

• 

  Fig. 3 Scatter plot between Go-Me and severity of class III.

Reference

References

1. Davies SJ. 2007; Malocclusion--a term in need of dropping or redefinition? Br Dent J. 202:519–20. https://doi.org/10.1038/bdj.2007.372. DOI: 10.1038/bdj.2007.372. PMID: 17496860.

2. Im YH, Ko SO, Shin HK. 2001; A study on the postoperative stability of LeFort I osteotomy in the two-jaw surgery of the skeletal class III malocclusion patients. J Korean Assoc Oral Maxillofac Surg. 27:397–403.

3. Solow B. 1980; The dentoalveolar compensatory mechanism: background and clinical implications. Br J Orthod. 7:145–61. https://doi.org/10.1179/bjo.7.3.145. DOI: 10.1179/bjo.7.3.145. PMID: 6934010.

4. Goldsman S. 1959; The variations in skeletal and denture patterns in excellent adult facial types. Angle Orthod. 29:63–92.

5. Moyers RE. 1976. Standards of human occlusal development. Center for Human Growth and Development, University of Michigan.

6. Graber LW, Vanarsdall RL, Vig KWL, Huang GJ. 2016. Orthodontics: current principles and techniques. Elsevier.

7. Kim SJ, Kim KH, Yu HS, Baik HS. 2014; Dentoalveolar compensation according to skeletal discrepancy and overjet in skeletal Class III patients. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 145:317–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2013.11.014. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2013.11.014. PMID: 24582023.

8. Ceylan I, Yavuz I, Arslan F. 2003; The effects of overjet on dentoalveolar compensation. Eur J Orthod. 25:325–30. DOI: 10.1093/ejo/25.3.325. PMID: 12831224.

9. Ishikawa H, Nakamura S, Iwasaki H, Kitazawa S, Tsukada H, Sato Y. 1999; Dentoalveolar compensation related to variations in sagittal jaw relationships. Angle Orthod. 69:534–8.

10. Mathapun J, Charoemratrote C. 2024; Is incisor compensation related to skeletal discrepancies in skeletal class III? A retrospective cephalometric study. Diagnostics (Basel). 14:1021. https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics14101021. DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics14101021. PMID: 38786319. PMCID: PMC11119506.

11. Kumar V, Sundareswaran S. 2014; Cephalometric assessment of sagittal dysplasia: a review of twenty-one methods. J Indian Orthod Soc. 48:33–41. DOI: 10.1177/0974909820140106.

12. Iwasaki H, Ishikawa H, Chowdhury L, Nakamura S, Iida J. 2002; Properties of the ANB angle and the Wits appraisal in the skeletal estimation of Angle's Class III patients. Eur J Orthod. 24:477–83. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/24.5.477. DOI: 10.1093/ejo/24.5.477. PMID: 12407943.

13. Kumar DK. 1991. A handbook of cephalometric norms for use with Indian population. Indian Orthodontic Society Publication.

14. Al-Kadhim AHA, Khairuzzaman NA, AB Halim WNH, Hafiz A. 2023; Dentoalveolar and soft tissue compensation in class III malocclusion. Int Med J. 30:30–2.

15. Alhammadi MS. 2019; Dentoalveolar compensation in different anterioposterior and vertical skeletal malocclusions. J Clin Exp Dent. 11:e745–53. https://doi.org/10.4317%2Fjced.56020. DOI: 10.4317/jced.56020. PMID: 31598204. PMCID: PMC6776409.

16. Kang DH, Kwon TG, Lee SH, Kim HS. 2007; Comparison of cranial base morphology between the mandibular prognathism and maxillary retrognathism in skeletal class III patients. J Korean Assoc Oral Maxillofac Surg. 33:204–10.

17. Maddalone M, Losi F, Rota E, Baldoni MG. 2019; Relationship between the position of the incisors and the thickness of the soft tissues in the upper jaw: cephalometric evaluation. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent. 12:391–7. https://doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10005-1667. DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10005-1667. PMID: 32440043. PMCID: PMC7229373.