International Journal of Biomedical Science and Engineering
Volume 4, Issue 2, April 2016, Pages: 7-12

Comparison of Different Sagittal Dysplasia Indicators in a Sample from Syrian Population

Sleiman Hassan Ahmad, Yazan Talat Jahjah

Department of Orthodontics Faculty of Dentistry, Tishreen University, Lattakia, Syria

Email address:

(S. H. Ahmad)

To cite this article:

Sleiman Hassan Ahmad, Yazan Talat Jahjah. Comparison of Different Sagittal Dysplasia Indicators in a Sample from Syrian Population. International Journal of Biomedical Science and Engineering. Vol. 4, No. 2, 2016, pp. 7-12. doi: 10.11648/j.ijbse.20160402.11

Received: January 28, 2016; Accepted: February 8, 2016; Published: March 17, 2016


Abstract: In orthodontic diagnosis, an accurate evaluation of sagittal jaw relationship is critically important. There are numerous angular and linear measurement could be used to evaluating the antero-posterior jaw discrepancy between maxilla and mandible so as to reach the correct diagnosis such. The usual practice is to compare the cephalometric analysis of the patient with the established normal values. Since craniofacial morphology varies among different populations therefore it becomes important to establish the cephalometric norms of all cephalometric analyses, for every population. The aims of this study were to evaluate the validity of ANB Angle, BETA Angle, W Angle and YEN Angle in Syrian sample. Materials and methods: 60 lateral cephalometric radiographs of Syrian population (35 boys and 25 girls), were traced for ANB, Wits appraisal, Beta angle, W angle and YEN angle. Patients were divided into skeletal Class I, II and III groups. Result: No statistically significant difference was found in all measurements values. ANB, BETA, W and YEN angle not differed significantly from the stander measurements in all three groups (p<0.05). The mean value for: the ANB angle for the Syrian population was3.4 degrees with SD of 0.6, and for the Beta angle was30degrees with SD of 4.2, and for the W angle was 53.7degrees with SD of 1.6. YEN angle mean value for the Syrian population was 120 degrees with SD of 1.5. These results suggest that all the performed analyses are valid and can be used to diagnose skeletal discrepancies and diagnosis based on single analysis is insufficient.

Keywords: Sagittal Discrepancy, ANB Angle, Beta Angle, W Angle, YEN Angle, Syrian


1. Introduction

Cephalometric analysis is an integral part of diagnosis as well as treatment planning in contemporary orthodontics.

It is practiced by comparing patient’s radiographic measurements with norms or standard values, most of which are obtained from the researches that involved sample from American or European populations [1].

Therefore it is not justified to apply these standard values in other populations because of possible ethnic and racial variations. Many investigators have found marked difference in the cranio facial morphology in various ethnicities which reflects in cephalometric measurements too [2-3].

In a study that involved Chinese and British white children, significant difference was found in sagittal (antero-posterior) and vertical cephalometric measurements [4].

Another study concluded that convex profile with short mandible is more common in Saudis as compared to Europeans-Americans [5].

Korean children are more prone to develop skeletal Class III malocclusion due to smaller anterior cranial base, midface deficiency and larger mandible [6].

The sagittal jaw relationships are difficult to evaluate and can vary in response to many intervening factors as rotation of the jaws during growth, vertical relationship between jaws, the relative stability of the reference planes during growth, Lack of validity of the various method proposed for their evaluation, age, gender and racial origin as well as facial type [7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12].

2. Aim of the Research and Its Importance

To provide a more precise reliable parameter for assessment of sagittal jaw relationship.

3. Research Methods and Materials

Sixty Caucasian Syrian adult subjects (35 males, 25 females) with the mean age of 22.8 years, with no prior orthodontics treatment (17 to 27 years of age) who seek treatment at orthodontic clinics at the Department of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics at Tishreen University (In the period between 2011 and 2014) were selected.

All skeletal classes (class I, II and III) with complete permanent dentition including Second molars were included in the study. Patients having craniofacial malformations, facial asymmetry and cleft palate; patients with history of previous orthodontic treatment and patient with history of interracial marriage in parents or grandparents, were excluded from the study.

All radiographs were traced by single operator in a standard manner for following measurements (Fig. 1 a, b).

To determine the minimum sample size to be statistically significant, a pilot study was realized on 60 subjects. It has been found that descriptive statistics results follow the normal distribution; and with a significance level of 99%requires a sample size of 18 patients as minimum, whereas the size of the sample in this study was n= 60.

lateral cephalometric analysis:

Cephalograms were traced, and ANB, Wits appraisal, and Beta angle, Yen angle and W-angle were measured to find the antero-posterior dysplasia and then they were divided into 3 groups:

Group I - Class I skeletal pattern group (n=20).

Group II - Class II skeletal pattern group (n=21).

Group III - Class III skeletal pattern group (n=19).

For a patient to be included in the Classes I, II, or III skeletal pattern group

To be included in the skeletal class I, a patient had to have a minimum of three of the five parameters (ANB, Wits appraisal, and Beta angle, Yen angle and W-angle)

A skeletal class1 relationship was indicated by an:

ANB angle of 1° to 3°, a Wits appraisal between 0 and -3 mm, a Beta angle between 27° - 35° degrees, a Yen angle between 117° - 123°(5)W angle between 51° - 56° and pleasant profile.

20 lateral cephalograms (10 female and 10 male) were collected from the screened files that met the above criteria to form the skeletal Class I group.

A skeletal Class II relationship was indicated by an ANB of greater than 4 degrees, a Wits appraisal with AO ahead of BO in females or AO coinciding with or ahead of BO in males, a Beta angle less than 27 degrees, Yen angle less than 117° and a W-angle less than 51° and the profile had a Class II appearance.

21 lateral cephalograms (12 female and 9 male) were collected from the screened files that met the above criteria to form the skeletal Class II group.

The skeletal Class III individuals were characterized by an ANB less than 2 degrees, a Wits BO ahead of AO in females or BO ahead of AO by more than 1 mm in males, and a Beta angle greater than 35 degrees, Yen angle more than 123°, and a Wangle more than 56° and the profile had a Class III appearance.19 lateral cephalograms (3 female and 16 male) met the required criteria.

lateral cephalograms has been scanned into JPEG digital format at 300 dpi and an 8-bit greyscale using scanner with 1600 dpi imaging 40 800 pixels per line and 48-bit color depth, and displayed on 15-inch LCD screen Notebook with resolution of 1366 X 768, high-pixel resolution with pixel pitch of 0.297 mm, a contrast ratio of 450: 1, and a brightness of 250 cd/m 2, with 32-bit color. The digital tracing of the lateral cephalogram was done using Dolphin Imaging Software Version 11 (Dolphin Imaging). All the cephalograms were recorded with the same exposure parameters and in the same machine.

Landmarks and planes used in this study for analyses:

S: Sella (center of sella turcica) [13, 14].

N: Nasion (frontonasal suture at its most superior point) [13, 14].

Point A: deepest point at concavity on maxillary alveolar bone [13, 14].

Point B: deepest point at concavity on mandibular alveolar bone [13, 14].

Functional occclusal plane: line passing through the occlusion of molars and premolars.

M: midpoint of premaxilla [15].

C: center of the condyle [16].

G: center of mandibular symphysis [17].

Analyses performed in this research: (Fig. 1 a, b)

1.   ANB angle: The angle around the center N and between the markers A and B. (in degrees)[18, 19, 20].

2.   Wits appraisal: the distance between perpendiculars drawn from the occlusal plane to Points A and B. Jacobson (1975, 1976), Panagiotidis, Witt (1976) and Ferrazzini (1976).

3.   Beta angle: Angle formed between the Line from point A perpendicular to the C-B line and the A-B line. [21]

4.   Yen angle: an angle between line SM and MG. [22]

5.   W angle: the angle between the perpendicular line from point M to S–G line and the M–G line. [23]

Error of method:

To control the errors in tracing and analysis, Dalhberg’s24) formula was applied:

ME = √∑(x1-x2)2/2n

Where x1 is the first measurement, x2 the second measurement and n the number of repeated records [25].

This formula determines the difference between 2 measurements taken at least one month apart.

sixty (20+21+19) randomly selected lateral cephalometric radiographs were retraced and re measured to calculate the error in the method from each population.

This study was designed and conducted according to the guidelines of Strengthening the Reporting of Observational studies in Epidemiology (STROBE), and we applied the STROBE checklist in the preparation of this manuscript [26].

The combined error for any of the variable was small and considered to be within acceptable limit [25].

Statistical Analysis

The data were verified and analyzed statistically using IBM SPSS Statistics Version 20.0 with confidence level set at 5% (P <0.05) to test for significance. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) was applied to evaluate the difference in the values for three skeletal classes in all sagittal measurements. Student's t test was applied to determine any significant sex difference in measurements and Coefficient Correlation analysis was done. All analysis was done using SPSS version 11.

Figure 1. Cephalometric tracing: ANB, Wits appraisal, Beta angle, W angle and YEN angle.

4. Results

Descriptive statistics for the age of the male, female, and all subjects of the sample are presented in (Table 1).

Table 1. Descriptive statistics for the age of the male, female, and all subjects of the sample.

Count Min Max Mean Standard Deviation Sample Variance
♂ age 35 17 27 22.9 3.1 9.5
♀ age 25 17 27 22.6 3.2 10.5
♂&♀ age 60 17 27 22.8 3.1 9.8

Table 2 shows the mean values for sagittal analyses i.e. ANB, Wits, Beta angle, W angle and YEN angle in Syrian sample, which shows no significant difference in the values among all skeletal classes (p 0.001).

Table 2. The mean values for sagittal analyses i.e. ANB, Wits, Beta angle, W angle and YEN angle in Syrian sample.

Class ANB WITS YEN BETA W
I Mean 3.415 0.650 120.575 29.915 53.780
N 20 20 20 20 20
Std. Deviation 0.6377 1.8992 1.5525 4.2396 1.5807
II Mean 7.157 4.200 113.119 20.905 48.643
N 21 21 21 21 21
Std. Deviation 1.6774 1.6808 3.1296 6.9621 2.3258
III Mean .053 -3.768- 129.079 36.795 59.632
N 19 19 19 19 19
Std. Deviation 2.1493 1.7695 2.9440 2.9499 1.9325
Total Mean 3.660 .493 120.658 28.940 53.835
N 60 60 60 60 60
Std. Deviation 3.3254 3.7178 7.0575 8.2490 4.9188
p-VALUE .000 .000 .000 .000 .000
Sig *** *** *** *** ***

There was no statistically significant difference between our sample and the mean value of these sagittal analyses of the sexes within the groups (Table 3).

Table 3. The mean value of sagittal analyses of the sexes within the groups.

class gender ANB WITS YEN BETA W
I Male Mean 3.440 -.270- 120.050 29.840 53.450
N 10 10 10 10 10
Std. Deviation .6381 2.3152 1.5707 5.3050 1.1806
Female Mean 3.390 1.570 121.100 29.990 54.110
N 10 10 10 10 10
Std. Deviation .6707 .6111 1.4174 3.1289 1.9076
Total Mean 3.415 .650 120.575 29.915 53.780
N 20 20 20 20 20
Std. Deviation .6377 1.8992 1.5525 4.2396 1.5807
II Male Mean 7.000 4.822 114.267 18.822 48.678
N 9 9 9 9 9
Std. Deviation 1.8755 1.8880 2.9099 8.8012 1.7130
Female Mean 7.275 3.733 112.258 22.467 48.617
N 12 12 12 12 12
Std. Deviation 1.5881 1.4106 3.1248 5.0581 2.7748
Total Mean 7.157 4.200 113.119 20.905 48.643
N 21 21 21 21 21
Std. Deviation 1.6774 1.6808 3.1296 6.9621 2.3258
III Male Mean -.200- -3.675- 129.081 36.956 59.588
N 16 16 16 16 16
Std. Deviation 2.2563 1.6988 3.1663 2.9253 2.0458
Female Mean 1.400 -4.267- 129.067 35.933 59.867
N 3 3 3 3 3
Std. Deviation .4000 2.4685 1.6773 3.5796 1.4572
Total Mean .053 -3.768- 129.079 36.795 59.632
N 19 19 19 19 19
Std. Deviation 2.1493 1.7695 2.9440 2.9499 1.9325

Table 4 shows that there is no significant difference in Syrian population in the mean value of all among all skeletal classes (P value ≤0.05).

Table 4. P value of Anova-test shows that there is no significant difference in syrian population in the mean value of all among all skeletal classes (P value ≤0.05).

  F Sig
ANB * class 97.866 .000
WITS * class 99.630 .000
YEN * class 182.094 .000
BETA * class 49.465 .000
W * class 154.030 .000

There is significant correlation between the mean value of sagittal analyses and all skeletal classes.

5. Discussion

This study evaluate and compare some important angular measurement that could be used to evaluating the sagittal jaws relationship relation such as ANB angle, Wits appraisal, Beta angle, YEN angle and W-angle in Syrian Population.

In this study ANB angle, beta angle, W angle and YEN angle in Syrian sample for all three classes cases showed no significant difference as compared to original value of these measurements. (p≤0.001).

In our samples the mean value of Beta angle for class I patients (p≤0.001). The value was comparable to the Caucasians [7, 30, 21].

W angle and YEN angle are relatively new measurements therefore no previous work has been done in Syrian populations yet.

Our main value of ANB angle (3.4±0.6) was close to ANB angle for Saudi population (3.30±2.17) as Al-Jabaa AH and Aldrees AM33suggest in their study, Whereas The norm for ANB angle was 4.14° in class I cases among Pakistani sample 34, which is much higher than Syrian value (3.4±6).

our result was in contrary with (Mohammad Khursheed Alam et al), 35 study in a Sample from Pakistani and Bangladeshi Populations, because he suggested to follow their own cephalometric norms for treatment of patients belonging to their respective populations because Bangladeshi and Pakistani populations differ in craniofacial morphology.

The norm for W angle was established for the Pakistani (54.5±3) and Bangladeshi population (55±3), but in our study it was (53.7±1.6).

The norm for Yen angle was established for the Pakistani (119.40 ± 3.51), whereas in our study was (120.5±1.5).

We can explain that different in values between Bangladeshi and Pakistani populations and original values because their populations differ in character, Size, growth, and shape.

These differences can be explained also due to a complicated interaction of genetic and environmental factors. [36].

So It is illogical to apply the standards of one racial group to another, or to apply the standards of one subgroup to another.

For the same reason there is no significant difference between our measurements in Syrian sample and standards values, because the Syrian people belong to the Caucasian race.

The results of the present study also support the idea that a morphological and anthropological findings indicate each racial group have its own standards [32].

All above is suggested that Syrian populations do not differ very much in craniofacial morphology from Caucasian; therefore the original cephalometric norms could be followed for treatment of patients belonging to Syrian populations.

6. Conclusion

1. ANB angle, beta angle, W angle and YEN angle in Syrian sample for all three classes cases showed no significant difference as compared to original value of these measurements. ((p≤0.001)

2. The results suggest that our values similar to the original data. Therefore, all the performed measurements are valid and can also be used on an Arabian or at least a Syrian population to evaluate Sagittal discrepancy.

3. Syrian populations do not differ very much in craniofacial morphology from Caucasian; therefore the original cephalometric norms could be followed for treatment of patients belonging to Syrian populations.

Acknowledgement

The authors would like to thank the subjects who participated in this study. This research was supported by Department of Orthodontics in Faculty of Dentistry/Tishreen University.


References

  1. Hwang H-S, Kim W-S AND Mcnamara JR JA. Ethnic differences in the soft tissue profile of Korean and European-American adults with normal occlusions and well-balanced faces. Angle orthod 72: 72-80, 2002.
  2. Cotton WN, Takano WS AND Wong WM. The Downs analysis applied to three other ethnic groups. Angle Orthod 21: 213-220, 1951
  3. Shalhoub S, Sarhan O AND Shaikh H. Adult cephalometric norms for Saudi Arabians with a comparison of values for Saudi and North American Caucasians. J Orthod 14: 273-279, 1987.
  4. Wu JYC, Hägg U, Pancherz H, Wong RWK AND Mcgrath C. Sagittal and vertical occlusal cephalometric analyses of Pancherz: Norms for Chinese children. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 137: 816-824, 2010.
  5. Hassan AH. Cephalometric norms for Saudi adults living in the western region of Saudi Arabia. Angle Orthod 76: 109-113, 2006.
  6. Singh G, Mcnamara JR J AND Lozan off S. Craniofacial heterogeneity of prepubertal Korean and European-American subjects with Class III malocclusions: procrustes,EDMA, and cephalometric analyses. Int J Adult Orthod Orthognath Surg 13: 227-40, 1997.
  7. Jacobson, A., 1975. The "Wits" appraisal of jaw disharmony. American Journal of orthodontics, 67:125-138.
  8. Freeman, R.S., 1981. Adjusting ANB angle to reflect the effect of maxillary position. Angle Orthodontist,51: 162-172.
  9. Richardson, M., 1982. Measurement of dental base relationship. European journal of Orthodontics, 4:251-256.
  10. Bishara, S.E., J.A. Fahl, L.C. Peterson, 1983 Longitudinal changes in the angle ANB and Wits appraisal:clinical implication American Journal of Orthodontics, 84: 133-139.
  11. Oktay, H., 1991. A comparison of ANB, wits, AF-BF and APDI measurements. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, 99: 122-128.
  12. Jarvinen, S., 1986. Floating norms for the ANB angle as guidance for clinical considerations. American Journal of orthodontics and Dentofacial orthopedics, 90: 383-387.
  13. Downs B.W. Variations in facial relationship: their significance in treatment and prognosis.The Angle Orthodontist: July 1949, Vol. 19, No. 3, pp. 145-155.30.
  14. Downs B.W. The role of cephalometrics in orthodontic case analysis and diagnosis.A.J.ORTHOD. Volume 38, Issue 3, March 1952, Pages 162–182. 31.
  15. Nanda R S, Merrill R M 1994. Cephalometric assessment of sagittal relationship between maxilla and mandible. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 105: 328–344.
  16. Adenwalla S T, Kronman J H, Attarzadeh F 1988.Porion and condyle as cephalometric landmarks: an error study. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 94: 411–415.
  17. Braun S, Kittleson R, Kim K 2004.The G-Axis: a growth vector for the mandible. Angle Orthodontist 74: 328–331.
  18. Steiner C.C. cephalometrics for you and me. Am. j. Orthod. 1953; 39: 729.
  19. Steiner C.C. Cephalometrics in clinical practice. Angle Orthod. 1959;29:8–29.
  20. Steiner C.C. Cephalometrics as an aid to planning and assessing orthodontic treatment. AJO-DO 1960 Oct (721-735).
  21. Baik CY, Ververidou M: A new approach of assessing sagittal discrepancies: the Beta angle. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 2004;126: 100-105.
  22. Neela PK, Mascarenhas R, Husain A: A new sagittal dysplasia indicator: the Yen angle. World Journal of Orthodontics 2009;10:147-151.
  23. Bhad WA, Nayak S AND Doshi UH: A new approach of assessing sagittal dysplasia: the W angle: European Journal of Orthodontic 2011:1-5.
  24. Springate S. The effect of sample size and bias on the reliability of estimates of error: a comparative study of Dahlberg’s formula. Eur J Orthod 34: 158-163, 2012.
  25. Houston W. The analysis of errors in orthodontic measurements.Am J Orthod 83: 382-390, 1983.
  26. Von ELM E, Altman DG, Egger M, Pocock SJ, GØTZSCHE PC AND VANDENBROUCKE JP.The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology [STROBE] statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies.Gac Sanit 22: 144-150, 2008.
  27. Riedel RA. Esthetics and its relation to orthodontic therapy. Angle Orthod 20: 168-178, 1950.
  28. Sherman SL, WOODS M AND NANDA RS. The longitudinal effects of growth on the Wits appraisal. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 93: 429-436, 1988.
  29. Forsberg C-M AND ODENRICK L. Identification of the cephalometric reference point condylion on lateral head films. Angle Orthod 59: 123-130, 1989.
  30. Purmal K, ALAM MK AND ZAM ZAM NM.Cephalometric Norms of Malaysian Adult Chinese. Int Med J 20: 87-91,2013.
  31. Coon CS. The races of Europe. NewYork: Macmillan, 1948.
  32. Coon CS, GARN SM, BERSILL JB. RACES: A study of the problems of race formation in man. Charles C.Thomas, Springfield, Illinois, 1950;65-71.
  33. AL-Jabaa AH, Aldrees AM (2014) ANB, Wits and Molar Relationship, Do they correlate in Orthodontic Patients?. Dentistry 4: 240. doi: 10.4172/2161-1122.1000240.
  34. Jabbar A AND Mahmood A. Correlation of overjet, ANB and wits appraisal for assessment of sagittal skeletal relationship. Pak Orthod J 4:17-23, 2012.
  35. Mohammad Khursheedalam, IrfanQamruddin, RinaMuraoka, Keisuke Nakano and Norimasa Okafuji. Validity of W Angle and YEN Angle in a Sample from Pakistani andBangladeshi Populations. J.Hard Tissue Biology Vol. 23(3):351-356, 2014.
  36. Tanner JM. Foetus into man, physical growth from conception to maturity. 2nd ed, Castlemead Pub,1989.

Article Tools
  Abstract
  PDF(736K)
Follow on us
ADDRESS
Science Publishing Group
548 FASHION AVENUE
NEW YORK, NY 10018
U.S.A.
Tel: (001)347-688-8931