REGRESSION MODELS OF INDIVIDUAL CEPHALOMETRIC PARAMETERS IN UKRAINIAN YOUNG MEN AND YOUNG WOMEN WITH DIFFERENT FACIAL PROFILES ACCORDING TO SCHWARZ A.M., WHICH CAN BE ADJUSTED DURING SURGERY DEPENDING ON THE PARAMETERS THAT USUALLY DO NOT CHANGE

  • O.S. Prokopenko National Pirogov Memorial Medical University, Vinnytsya, Ukraine
Keywords: lateral teleroentgenography, juvenile age, face profiles by Schwarz, regression models, cephalometric indices.

Abstract

For Ukrainian young men and young women with different facial profiles according to Schwarz A. M. with normal occlusion close to orthognathic occlusion and a harmonious face, regression models of teleroentgenographic parameters, which can be corrected during surgery (2 group of indicators) depending on the parameters that usually do not change (1 group of indicators) were constructed and analyzed.

In young men, 10 of 27 possible reliable regression models with a coefficient of determination greater than 0.6 (R2 = from 0,642 to 0,995) were constructed, and in young women – 13 models from 27 possible (R2 = from 0,619 to 0,956). Both for young men and young women, the most models of indicators of the second group are built for linear dimensions – both young men and young women have 7 models from 9 possible each.

The constructed regression equations of teleroentgenographic indicators included into the second group according to the Schwarz A. M. method the most often comprise the following indicators of the first group: in young men – ar-Go distances according to Burstone C. J., N-CC according to Ricketts R. M., N-Se according to Schwarz A. M. and indicator N-S:S-Ar' according to Bjork A.; in young women – indicator S-ar:ar-Go according to Jarabak J. R., distances N-S according to Jarabak J. R. and ar-Go according to Burstone C. J. and angle POr-NBa according to Ricketts R. M.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

1. Dmitriev МО. Koreliatsii osnovnykh kranialnykh pokaznykiv z kharakterystykamy verkhnoi ta nyzhnoi shchelep u meshkantsiv Ukrainy yunatskoho viku. Svit medytsyny ta biolohii. 2016;4(58):24-9. (Ukrainian).

2. Dmitriev МО. Zviazky osnovnykh kranialnykh pokaznykiv z kharakterystykamy polozhennia zubiv verkhnoi i nyzhnoi shchelep ta profilem miakykh tkanyn oblychchia v yunakiv i divchat. Visnyk morfolohii. 2017;23(1):125-31. (Ukrainian).

3. Doroshenko SI, Kulginskii EA. Osnovy` telerentgenografii. K., Zdorov'ya; 2007. 72 s. (Russian).

4. Moroz VM, Gunas IV, Dmitriev МО, Prokopenko OS. Koreliatsii liniinykh pokaznykiv nyzhnoi shchelepy z kharakterystykamy polozhennia zubiv ta profiliu miakykh tkanyn lytsia u meshkantsiv Ukrainy yunatskoho viku. Biomedical and Biosocial Аnthropology. 2016;27:81-8. (Ukrainian).

5. Alshammery DA, Almubarak S, Hezaim AB, Alkhunein R, Pani SC, Mossadomi H. Cephalometric norms of skeletal relationship among populations in selected Arab countries: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Saudi Journal of Oral Sciences. 2016;3(2):69-74. doi: 10.4103/1658-6816.188079.

6. Amini F, Razavian ZS, Rakhshan V. Soft tissue cephalometric norms of Iranian class I adults with good occlusions and balanced faces. International orthodontics. 2016;14(1):108-22.

7. Atit MB, Deshmukh SV, Rahalkar J, Subramanian V, Naik C, Darda M. Mean values of Steiner, Tweed, Ricketts and McNamara analysis in Maratha ethnic population: A cephalometric study. APOS Trends in Orthodontics. 2013;3(5):137-51. doi: 10.4103/2321-1407.119095.

8. Behbehani F, Hicks EP, Beeman C, Kluemper GT, Rayens MK. Racial variations in cephalometric analysis between Whites and Kuwaitis. Angle Orthod. 2006;76(3):406-11. doi: 10.1043/0003-3219(2006)076[0406:RVICAB]2.0.CO;2.

9. Björk A. Sutural growth of the upper face studied by the implant method. Acta Odontologica Scandinavica. 1966;24(2):109-27.

10. Burstone CJ. Lip posture and its significance in treatment planning. Am. J. Orthod. 1967;53(4):262-84.

11. Castillo JC, Gianneschi G, Azer D, et al. The relationship between 3D dentofacial photogrammetry measurements and traditional cephalometric measurements. The Angle Orthodontist. 2019;89(2):275-83. doi: 10.2319/120317-825.1.

12. Chernysh AV, Hasiuk PA, Yasko VV, Smolko DG. Regression models of individual cephalometric indicators used in the method of E. P. Harvold. Visnyk morfolohii. 2018;24(4):29-34.

13. Chernysh AV. Regression models of individual cephalometric indicators used in the method of R. M. Ricketts. Biomedical and Biosocial Anthropology. 2018;32:56-62.

14. Dmitriev МО, Dudik ОP, Chugu TV, Cherkasova OV. Modeling of gnatometric indices depending on parameters of basal cranial structures in boys and girls with orthognathic bite. Visnyk naukovykh doslidzhen. 2018;1(90):110-3.

15. Gueye M, Dieng L, Mbodj EB, Seck AK, Toure A, Thioune N, Ngom PI. Relationship between bizygomatic width and the size of maxillary anterior teeth among young Senegalese black people recruited in army. Odontostomatol. Trop. 2014;37(148):5-12.

16. Gunas IV, Chernysh AV, Cherkasov VG, Cherkasova OV. Modeling by using regression analysis of teleroentgenographic individual indicators used in the method of Charles J. Burstone. Biomedical and Biosocial Anthropology. 2018;31:59-65.

17. Hashim HA, AlBarakati SF. Cephalometric soft tissue profile analysis between two different ethnic groups: a comparative study. J Contemp Dent Pract. 2003;4(2):60-73.

18. Jacobson A, White L. Radiographic cephalometry: from basics to 3-D imaging. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics. 2007;131(4):215-22.

19. Jarabak JR, Fizzell JA. Technique and treatment with light-wire edgewise appliances, ed. 2, St. Louis. The CV Mosby Company; 1972. 635 р.

20. Johannsdottir B, Thordarson A, Magnusson TE. Craniofacial skeletal and soft tissue morphology in Icelandic adults. European Journal of Orthodontics. 2004;26:245-50. doi: 10.1093/ejo/26.3.245.

21. Kilic N, Catal G, Oktay H. McNamara norms for Turkish adolescents with balanced faces and normal occlusion. Aust. Orthod. J. 2010;26(1):33-7.

22. Mohammad HA, Abu Hassan MI, Hussain SF. Academic Journals Cephalometric evaluation for Malaysian Malay by Steiner analysis. Scientific Research and Essays. 2011;6(3):627-34. doi: 10.5897/SRE10.869.

23. Phulari B. An atlas on cephalometric landmarks. JP Medical Ltd; 2013. 230 р.

24. Ricketts RM. Cephalometric analysis and synthesis. The Angle Orthodontist. 1961;31(3):141-56.

25. Schwarz AM. Roentgenostatics: a practical evaluation of the x-ray headplate. American Journal of Orthodontics. 1961;47(8):561-85.

26. Schwarz AM. Röntgenostatics; Practical Evaluation of the Tele-X-ray-photo (study-head-plate) (Vol. 1). Leo L. Bruder; 1960. 48 р.

27. Steiner CC. Cephalometrics in clinical practice. Angle Orthod.. 1959;29:8-29.
Published
2021-06-29
How to Cite
Prokopenko, O. (2021). REGRESSION MODELS OF INDIVIDUAL CEPHALOMETRIC PARAMETERS IN UKRAINIAN YOUNG MEN AND YOUNG WOMEN WITH DIFFERENT FACIAL PROFILES ACCORDING TO SCHWARZ A.M., WHICH CAN BE ADJUSTED DURING SURGERY DEPENDING ON THE PARAMETERS THAT USUALLY DO NOT CHANGE. Ukrainian Dental Almanac, (2), 95-101. https://doi.org/10.31718/2409-0255.2.2021.17
Section
ORTHODONTICS