Cephalometric evaluation of condylar and mandibular growth modification: A review

Orthodontics and Craniofacial Research

Volumn 9, Issue 1, 2006, Pages 2-9

  Shen, G ^a   Darendeliler, M A ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY   (Australia)

Author keywords

Cephalometrics; Growth modification; Superimposition

Indexed keywords

CEPHALOMETRY; FEASIBILITY STUDY; GROWTH, DEVELOPMENT AND AGING; HISTOLOGY; HUMAN; MANDIBLE; MANDIBLE CONDYLE; METHODOLOGY; ORTHODONTIC DEVICE; ORTHODONTICS; REPRODUCIBILITY; REVIEW; STANDARD; STATISTICS;

ACTIVATOR APPLIANCES; CEPHALOMETRY; FEASIBILITY STUDIES; HUMANS; MANDIBLE; MANDIBULAR CONDYLE; ORTHODONTICS, CORRECTIVE; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS;

EID: 33645637420     PISSN: 16016335     EISSN: 16016343     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1601-6343.2006.00323.x     Document Type: Review

References (60)

1. Rabie AB, Hägg U. Factors regulating mandibular condylar growth. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 2002;122:401-9.
2. Shen G, Rabie AB, Hägg U, Chen RJ. Neovascularization in condylar cartilage in response to mandibular protrusion. Chin J Dent Res 2003;6:28-38.
3. Rabie AB, Shum L, Chayanupatkul A. VEGF and bone formation in the glenoid fossa during forward mandibular positioning. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 2002;122:202-9.
4. Du X, Hägg U, Rabie AB. Effects of headgear Herbst and mandibular step-by-step advancement versus conventional Herbst appliance and maximal jumping of the mandible. Eur J Orthod 2002;24:167-74.
5. Bendeus M, Hägg U, Rabie B. Growth and treatment changes in patients treated with a headgear-activator appliance. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 2002;121:376-84.
6. Hägg U, Attström K. Mandibular growth estimated by four cephalometric measurements. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1992;102:146-52.
7. Chen JY, Will LA, Niederman R. Analysis of efficacy of functional appliances on mandibular growth. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 2002;122:470-6.
8. Tulloch JF, Medland W, Tuncay OC. Methods used to evaluate growth modification in Class II malocclusion. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1990;98:340-7.
9. Paulsen HU. Morphological changes of the TMJ condyles of 100 patients treated with the Herbst appliance in the period of puberty to adulthood: a long-term radiographic study. Eur J Orthod 1997;19:657-68.
10. Okeson JP. Management of Temporomandibular Disorders and Occlusion, 4th edn. St Louis, MO: Mosby; 1998.
11. DeVincenzo JP. Changes in mandibular length before, during, and after successful orthopedic correction of Class II malocclusions, using a functional appliance. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1991;99:241-57.
12. Björk A, Skieller V. An implant study at the age of puberty. Am J Orthod 1972;62:339-83.
13. Adenwalla ST, Shabbir T, Kronman JH, Attarzadeh F. Porion and condyle as cephalometric landmarks-an error study. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1988;94:411-5.
14. Baughan B, Demirjian A, Levesque GY, Lapalme-Chaput L. The pattern of facial growth before and during puberty, as shown by French-Canadian girls. Ann Human Biol 1979;6:59-76.
15. Nelson C, Harkness M, Herbison P. Mandibular changes during functional appliance treatment. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1993;104:153-61.
16. Woodside DG. Do functional appliances have an orthopedic effect?. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1998;113:11-14.
17. Gianelly AA, Brosnan P, Martignoni M, Berstein L. Mandibular growth, condyle position, and Frankel appliance therapy. Angle Orthod 1983;53:131-42.
18. Jakobsson SO. Cephalometric evaluation of treatment effect on class II, division 1 malocclusion. Am J Orthod 1967;53:446-57.
19. Wieslander L. Long-term effect of treatment with headgear-Herbst appliance in early mixed dentition. Stability or relapse?. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1993;104:319-29.
20. Pancherz H, Hägg U. Dentofacial orthopedics in relation to somatic maturation. An analysis of 70 consecutive cases treated with the Herbst appliance. Am J Orthod 1985;88:273-87.
21. Hägg U, Pancherz H, Taranger J. Pubertal growth and orthodontic treatment. In: Carlson DS, Ribbens KA, editors. Craniofacial Growth During Adolescence. Monograph No.14, Craniofacial Growth Series. Ann Arbor: Center for Human Growth and Development, The University of Michigan; 1987. pp. 87-115.
22. Hägg U, Pancherz H. Dentofacial orthopaedics in relation to chronological age, growth period and skeletal development. An analysis of 72 male patients with class II division 1 malocclusion treated with the Herbst appliance. Eur J Orthod 1988;10:169-76.
23. Haas DW, Martinez DF, Eckert GJ, Diers NR. Measurements of mandibular length: a comparison of articulare vs condylion. Angle Orthod 2001;71:210-5.
24. Ghafari J, Baumrind S, Efstratiadis SS. Misinterpreting growth and treatment outcome from serial cephalographs. Clin Orthod Res 1998;1:102-6.
25. Athanasiou AE. Orthodontic Cephalometry. London: Mosby; 1995.
26. Björk A. Variations in the growth pattern of the human mandible: longitudinal radiographic study by the implant method. J Dent Res 1963;42:400-11.
27. Ireland AJ, McDonald F (eds). The Orthodontic Patient: Treatment and Biomechanics. New York: Oxford University Press; 2003.
28. Proffit WR, Ackerman JL. Orthodontic diagnosis: the development of a problem list. In: Proffit WR, Fields HW, (eds). Contemporary Orthodontics. St Louis: Mosby; 1993. pp. 139-86.
29. Ricketts RM. A four-step method to distinguish orthodontic changes from natural growth. J Clin Orthod 1975;9:218-28.
30. Heij Op DG, Callaert H, Opdebeek HM. The effect of amount of protrusion built into the Bionator on condylar growth and displacement: a clinical study. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1989;95:401-9.
31. Mamandras AH, Allen LP. Mandibular response to orthodontic treatment with the Bionator appliance. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1990;97:113-20.
32. Rakosi T (ed.). An Atlas and Manual of Cephalometric Radiography. London: Wolfe Medical Publications; 1982.
33. Ford HER. Growth of the human cranial base. Am J Orthod 1958;44:498-506.
34. Scott JH. Further studies on the growth of the face. Proc R Soc Med 1958;52:263-8.
35. Latham RA. The sella point and postnatal growth of the human cranial base. Am J Orthod 1972;41:156-62.
36. Melsen B. The cranial base. Acta Odont Scand 1974;32:1-26.
37. Bishara SE, Athanasiou AE. Cephalometric methods for assessment of dentofacial changes. In: Athanasiou AE (ed.). Orthodontic Cephalometry. London: Mosby; 1995pp. 105-25.
38. You QL, Hägg U. A comparison of three superimposition methods. Eur J Orthod 1999;21:717-25.
39. Pancherz H. The mechanism of class II correction in Herbst appliance treatment. A cephalometric investigation. Am J Orthod 1982;82:104-13.
40. Johnston LE. A comparative analysis of Class II treatments. In: Vig PS, Ribbens KA, editors. Science and Clinical Judgment in Orthodontics. Monograph No.19, Craniofacial Growth Series. Center for Human Growth and Development. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan; 1986. pp. 103-48.
41. Johnston LE. The ''Pitchfork'' analysis of skeletal and dental change. Revue d' Orthopédie Dento Faciale 1998;32:311-29.
42. Arat ZM, Rubenduz M, Akgul AA. The displacement of craniofacial reference landmarks during puberty: a comparison of three superimposition methods. Angle Orthod 2003;73:374-80.
43. Björk A, Skieller V. Normal and abnormal growth of the mandible. A synthesis of longitudinal cephalometric implant studies over a period of 25 years. Eur J Orthod 1983;5:1-46.
44. Doppel DM, Damon WM, Joondeph DR, Little RM. An investigation of maxillary superimposition techniques using metallic 3 implants. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1994;105:161-8.
45. Johnston LE Jr. Balancing the books on orthodontic treatment: an integrated analysis of change. Br J Orthod 1996;23:93-102.
46. Luder HU. Effects of activator treatment-evidence for the occurrence of two different types of reaction. Eur J Orthod 1981;3:205-22.
47. Baumrind S, Korn EL, Ben-Bassat Y, West EE. Quantification of maxillary remodeling. 1. A description of osseous changes relative to superimposition on metallic implants. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1987;91:29-41.
48. Nielsen IL. Maxillary superimposition: a comparison of three methods for cephalometric evaluation of growth and treatment change. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1989;95:422-31.
49. Björk A. Facial growth in man: studied with the aid of metallic implants. Acta Odont Scand 1955;13:9-34.
50. Björk A. Sutural growth of the upper face, studied by the implant method. Trans Eur Orthod Soc 1964;40:49-65.
51. Björk A. The use of metallic implants in the study of facial growth in children: method and application. Am J Phys Anthropol 1968;29:243-54.
52. Björk A, Skieller V. Normal and abnormal growth of the mandible. A synthesis of longitudinal cephalometric implant studies over a period of 25 years. Eur J Orthod 1983;5:1-46.
53. Björk A, Skieller V. Growth of the maxilla in three dimensions as revealed radiographically by the implant method. Br J Orthod 1977;4:53-64.
54. Mannchen R. A critical evaluation of the pitchfork analysis. Eur J Orthod 2001;23:1-14.
55. Efstratiadis SS, Cohen G, Ghafari J. Evaluation of differential growth and orthodontic treatment outcome by regional cephalometric superpositions. Angle Orthod 1999;69:225-30.
56. Hashim HA, Godfrey K. The reproducibility of Johnston's cephalometric superimposition method. Aust Orthod J 1990;11:227-31.
57. Ricketts RM. Perspectives in the clinical application of cephalometrics. Angle Orthod 1981;51:115-50.
58. Steiner CC. The use of cephalometrics as an aide to planning and assessing orthodontic treatment. Am J Orthod 1960;46:721-35.
59. Jacobson A. The ''Wits'' appraisal of jaw disharmony. Am J Orthod 1975;67:125-38.
60. Harris JE, Johnston LE, Moyers RE. A cephalometric template: its construction and clinical significance. Am J Orthod 1963;49:249- 63.