Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
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

Related Experiment Videos

Comparison between cephalometric classification methods for sagittal jaw relationships

K Hurmerinta1, A Rahkamo, K Haavikko

  • 1Department of Pedodontics and Orthodontics, Institute of Dentistry, University of Helsinki, Finland. khurmeri@hammas.helsinki.fi

European Journal of Oral Sciences
|June 1, 1997
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

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

Five year follow-up of mandibular distraction osteogenesis on the dentofacial structures of syndromic children.

Orthodontics & craniofacial research·2008
Same author

Effect of mandibular distraction osteogenesis on developing molars.

Orthodontics & craniofacial research·2007
Same author

Craniofacial cephalometric morphology in children with CATCH 22 syndrome.

Orthodontics & craniofacial research·2006
Same author

Reduction in head size in patients with aspartylglucosaminuria.

Acta neurologica Scandinavica·2005
Same author

Microvascular temporomandibular joint and mandibular ramus reconstruction in hemifacial microsomia.

The Journal of craniofacial surgery·2002
Same author

Craniofacial features in Cohen syndrome: an anthropometric and cephalometric analysis of 14 patients.

Clinical genetics·2002
Same journal

The emerging role of piRNAs in periodontal and orthodontic tissue dynamics: Biological insights and clinical perspectives-A review.

European journal of oral sciences·2026
Same journal

The speed of innovation versus the speed of validation: A growing governance gap in contemporary endodontics.

European journal of oral sciences·2026
Same journal

Effect of bioactive dentin modulators on adhesion of glass fiber posts.

European journal of oral sciences·2026
Same journal

Does the 2018 periodontal classification improve patient understanding? A missing piece in periodontal care.

European journal of oral sciences·2026
Same journal

Esthetic and adhesive properties of a novel colored fiber post: A restorative approach to an endodontic challenge.

European journal of oral sciences·2026
Same journal

Deep-layer integrity in bulk restorations: Effects of placement technique on fiber- and particulate-reinforced bulk-fill composites properties.

European journal of oral sciences·2026
See all related articles

Cephalometric analyses like ANB angle and WITS appraisal show significant differences in classifying sagittal skeletal relationships. Visual inspection remains crucial for accurate diagnosis, especially with age-related changes affecting measurements.

Area of Science:

  • Orthodontics and Dental Imaging
  • Craniofacial Morphology Analysis

Background:

  • Cephalometric analysis is vital for diagnosing skeletal discrepancies.
  • The ANB angle and WITS appraisal are commonly used for sagittal classification.
  • Variations in classification may arise from methodology and patient demographics.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To evaluate the classification of skeletal classes I, II, and III using ANB angle and WITS appraisal.
  • To compare cephalometric analysis results with visual inspection by orthodontic experts.
  • To investigate the influence of age and facial patterns on these classifications.

Main Methods:

  • Cross-sectional study of 497 Finnish boys aged 4-20 years.
  • Analysis of cephalometric radiographs using ANB angle and WITS appraisal.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Comparison of quantitative measurements with qualitative visual assessment by orthodontists.

    • Main Results:

    • Significant discrepancies were observed between ANB angle, WITS appraisal, and visual inspection in classifying sagittal skeletal relationships.
    • Both ANB angle and WITS appraisal showed biases, overemphasizing Class II and under-identifying Class I.
    • Age-related trends were noted: ANB angle decreased, while WITS appraisal increased with age, questioning fixed norm validity.

    Conclusions:

    • Standard cephalometric analyses (ANB angle, WITS appraisal) may provide controversial or inaccurate sagittal skeletal classifications.
    • Visual inspection is an essential complementary diagnostic tool for orthodontics.
    • Age-related changes necessitate caution when applying fixed cephalometric norms.