Jove
Visualize
Contact Us

Related Experiment Videos

Analysis of factors affecting angle ANB.

W Hussels, R S Nanda

    American Journal of Orthodontics
    |May 1, 1984
    PubMed
    Summary
    This summary is machine-generated.

    Cephalometric analysis using ANB angle has limitations in determining jaw relationships. A new formula corrects for geometric effects, providing a more accurate assessment of skeletal discrepancies for improved orthodontic treatment planning.

    Related Concept Videos

    You might also read

    Related Articles

    Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

    Sort by
    Same author

    Condylar movement analysis in subjects with clinically normal temporomandibular joints, utilizing an amorphous sensor.

    Journal of oral rehabilitation·2003
    Same author

    Changes in tooth position in humans in relation to arterial blood pressure.

    Archives of oral biology·2002
    Same author

    Posttreatment evaluation of the distal jet appliance.

    American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics : official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics·2001
    Same author

    The effect of saliva on shear bond strengths of hydrophilic bonding systems.

    American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics : official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics·2001
    Same author

    Effect of orthodontic therapy on the facial profile in long and short vertical facial patterns.

    American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics : official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics·2000
    Same author

    Evaluation of the Jones jig appliance for distal molar movement.

    American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics : official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics·2000
    JoVE
    x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
    ABOUT JoVE
    OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
    AUTHORS
    Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
    LIBRARIANS
    TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
    RESEARCH
    JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
    EDUCATION
    JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
    Terms & Conditions of Use
    Privacy Policy
    Policies

    Area of Science:

    • Orthodontics
    • Cephalometric Analysis
    • Craniofacial Growth

    Background:

    • Cephalometric analyses, relying on angular and linear measurements, are widely used in orthodontics for treatment planning.
    • The angle ANB is a common metric for assessing relative jaw relationships, but it is influenced by various factors.
    • Existing methods have limitations in accurately reflecting true skeletal discrepancies.

    Purpose of the Study:

    • To address the fallacies in traditional cephalometric analyses, particularly concerning the ANB angle.
    • To develop a mathematical formula to correct the ANB angle for geometric influences.
    • To provide a more accurate method for evaluating skeletal discrepancies in orthodontic treatment planning.

    Main Methods:

    • Development of a mathematical formula to account for four geometric effects influencing the ANB angle: jaw rotation, anteroposterior jaw position, vertical growth, and dental height.

    Related Experiment Videos

  • Comparison of measured ANB angles with calculated ANB angles for a Class I skeletal relationship (Wits = 0 mm).
  • Utilizing tables based on the formula with specific cephalometric values (SNB, omega, b, a) for correction.

    • Main Results:

    • The study demonstrates that the ANB angle can vary significantly even under ideal Class I skeletal conditions (Wits = 0 mm).
    • Contrary to common belief, a normal ANB angle range is not universally applicable due to geometric influences.
    • The developed formula and tables allow for the calculation of a corrected ANB angle, revealing the true skeletal discrepancy.

    Conclusions:

    • The ANB angle, as traditionally used, can be misleading in assessing skeletal relationships.
    • Correcting the ANB angle for geometric effects is crucial for accurate diagnosis and treatment planning in orthodontics.
    • This approach leads to a refined definition of skeletal Class II and III relationships, accounting for individual growth patterns.