Cephalometric Norms in Sudanese Sample: A Pilot Study
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##
Aims: In this study, cephalometric norms for Sudanese with class I normal occlusion were introduced, and the results were compared to those from other studies in various populations.
Materials and Methods: 29 cephalographs with ages ranging from 18 to 25 made up the sample. The selection criteria were met by all competitors. After that, cephalometric findings were compared to earlier findings from research among reported Arabs, as well as research among Oriental and Black races.
Results: When compared to Caucasian cephalometric norms, Sudanese showed greater mean values of the sagittal and vertical relationships. The inter-incisal angle decreased, and the upper and lower incisors were proclined in reference to their dental bases. The soft tissue variables show that the nasolabial angle was less acute and that the lips were slightly protruding in relation to Rickett's esthetic line. Black and Oriental races, as well as Arab populations possessed bimaxillary proclination and protrusion of the upper and lower incisors, whereas Caucasians had retrusive dentition.
Conclusion: Due to the small sample size, drawing a firm conclusion is challenging. Therefore, it is advised to use large sample sizes for both sexes in order to establish cephalometric norms, which will be very beneficial to not only orthodontists but also oral and maxillofacial surgeons, as well as pedodontist.
-
Broadbent B. A new x-ray technique and its application to orthodontia. Angle Orthodontist. 1931; 51(2): 93-114.
Google Scholar -
Hofrath H. Bedeutung der röntgenfern und abstands aufnahme für die diagnostik der kieferanomalien. Fortschritte der Orthodontie. 1931; 1: 231. German.
DOI
Google Scholar -
Downs WB. Variations in facial relationship: their significance in treatment and prognosis. Angle Orthodontist. 1949; 19(3): 145-55.
Google Scholar -
Steiner CC. Cephalometrics for you and me. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics. 1953; 39(10): 729-55.
DOI
Google Scholar -
Tweed CH. The Frankfort-Mandibular Incisor Angle (FMIA) In Orthodontic Diagnosis, Treatment Planning and Prognosis. Angle Orthodontist. 1954; 24(3): 121-69.
Google Scholar -
Hamdan AM. Cephalometric norms in an Arabic population. Journal of Orthodontics. 2001; 28: 297-300.
Google Scholar -
Sarhan OA. A comparative study between two randomly selected samples from which to derive standards for craniofacial measurements. Journal of Oral Rehabilitation. 1988; 15: 251-255.
DOI
Google Scholar -
Al-Jasser NM. Cephalometric evaluation of craniofacial variations in normal Saudi population according to Steiner analysis. Saudi Medical Journal. 2000; 21: 746-750.
Google Scholar -
Siddika A. Ricketts’ cephalometric analysis for Saudi population. Pesqui Bras Odontopediatria Clín Integr. 2020; 20: e5364
DOI
Google Scholar -
Yen PKJ. The facial configuration in a sample of Chinese males. Angle Orthodontist. 1973; 43: 301-304.
Google Scholar -
Miyajima K. Craniofacial structure of Japanese and European-American adults with normal occlusions and well-balanced faces. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics. 2011; 110: 431-438.
DOI
Google Scholar -
Bronfman CN. Cephalometric norms and esthetic profile preference for the Japanese: a systematic review. Dental Press J Orthod. 2015; 20(6): 43-51.
DOI
Google Scholar -
Bailey KL, Taylor RW. Mesh diagram cephalometric norms for Americans of African descent. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics. 1993; 114: 218-223.
DOI
Google Scholar -
Hashim HA. Cephalometric soft tissue profile analysis between two different ethnic groups: A comparative study. Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice. 2003; 2: 60-73.
DOI
Google Scholar -
Al Zain T. Cephalometric characterization of an adult Emirati sample with Class I malocclusion. Journal of Orthodontic Science. 2012; 1(1): 11-15.
DOI
Google Scholar -
Girhe V. Cephalometric norms for the north Indian population: A systematic review. National Journal of Maxillofacial Surgery. 2022; 13(2): 172-179.
DOI
Google Scholar -
Stedman T. Stedman’s medical dictionary. Baltimore: William & Wilkins; 1990.
Google Scholar -
Viken Sassouni, A roentgenographic cephalometric analysis of cephalo-facio-dental relationships. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics. 1955; 41(10): 735-764.
DOI
Google Scholar -
Harvold EP. The activator in orthodontics. St. Louis, Mo., Mosby, 1974.
Google Scholar -
Jacobson A. The “Wits” appraisal of jaw disharmony. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics. 1975; 67(2): 125-138.
DOI
Google Scholar -
Ricketts RM, Bench RW, Gugino CF, Hilgers JJ. Bioprogressive Therapy. Rocky Mountain Orthodontics. 1980.
Google Scholar -
McNamara Jr. A method of cephalometric evaluation. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics. 1984; 86: 449-469.
DOI
Google Scholar -
Jarabak JR. Technique and treatment with light wire edgewise appliances. Saint Louis, the C. V. Mosby Company 1972.
Google Scholar -
Saxby PJ. Dentoskeletal determinants of soft tissue morphology. Angle Orthodontist. 1985; 55(2): 147-154.
Google Scholar -
Eman I Salama, Abuaffan AH. Cephalometric Hard and Soft Tissue Norms for Sudanese Adults. Orthodontic Journal of Nepal. 2015; 5(2): 28-32.
DOI
Google Scholar -
Al-Jame B. Lateral cephalometric norms for adolescent Kuwaitis: Hard tissue measurements. Medical Principles and Practice. 2006; 15: 91-97.
DOI
Google Scholar -
Hamdan AM. Cephalometric norms in an Arab population. Journal of Orthodontics. 2001; 28: 297-300.
DOI
Google Scholar -
Ishara SE. Cephalometric comparisons of dentofacial parameters between Egyptian and North American adolescents. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics. 1990; 97: 413-421.
DOI
Google Scholar -
Cobourne MT. Handbook of Orthodontics. 2nd Edition. The orthodontic patient: Examination and Diagnosis. 2015.
Google Scholar -
Abu-Tayyem HM, Alshamsi AH, Hafez S, EL-Din EM. Cephalometric norms for a sample of Emirates adults. Open Journal of Stomatology. 2011; 1: 75-83.
DOI
Google Scholar