Abstract:OBJECTIVE:To classify the Angle I malocclusion subgroups using lateral radiographic films according to their ordinary coordinates and standardized coordinates converted by general procrusts analysis (GPA), and to compare the two kinds of classifications and their valne in diagnosis of malocclusion.METHODS:946 pretreatment lateral radiographic films of patients with Angle I malocclusion were chosen and their ordinary coordinates were acquired via soft ware. The ordinary coordinates were then converted into standardized coordinates by GPA. All of the films were classified by cluster analysis and discrimination analysis applying the upper two kinds of coordinates respectively.RESULTS:(1) Twenty one subgroups were identified according to the ordinary coordinates of the chosen films with the total differentiate rate of 92.7% and leave-one-out differentiate rate of 68.4% (Classification A). Correspondingly, 20 subgroups were identified according to the standardized coordinates with the two differentiate rates of 87.8% and 71.9% (Classification B). (2) If the ordinary coordinates were discriminated by Classification B, the total differentiate rate and leave-one- out differentiate rate were 79.8% and 60.2 % respectively. If the standardized coordinates were discriminated by Classification A, the two differentiate rates were 79.8% and 60.2 % respectively. (3) There were some subgroups having the similar form in Classification A and their difference mainly arose from the difference of the patient age, while there were no such subgroups like that in Classification B. (4)The proportion of the largest subgroup in total subjects is 15.9% and there were 8 subgroups having the number of subjects over 40 in Classification A, while the corresponding proportion and number of subgroups were 74.7% and 2 in Classification B. (5)Classification A and Classification B were both suitable to classify a new subject, but Classification B was required to standalize all of the subjects onc again, which was very complex, while Classification A was more simplified.CONCLUSION:Classification A and Classification B are interrelated. GPA could concentrate the subjects in cluster analysis, which reduces some influence of the age to the classification, but the process to classify a new subject is very complex. Thus if quick diagnosis is needed in clinics, Classification A should be recommended, but the influence of the age should be noted.

[Craniofacial characters for Angle's class II malocclusion using Procrusts superimposition and multivariate statistics].

Diagnostic template research of craniofacial characters of Class Ⅱ patients

[Analysis of Treatment Templates of Angle's Class III Malocclusion Patients].

[Comparative Study on Ordinary Coordinates and Standardized Coordinates Converted by General Procrusts Analyzation Method in Cluster Analysis and Discrimination Analysis of Angle I Malocclusion].

Classification and characterization of facial asymmetry in adult patients with skeletal Class III malocclusion using cluster analysis

The cranial base and maxillofacial morphology of Angle class Ⅱ malocclusion

THE STUDY OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN CRANIAL BASE AND ANGLE CLASS II AND III MALOCCLUSION

Component Analysis of Craniofacial Type of Xi'an Chinese with Class III Malocclusion in the Early Permanent Dentition

A factor analysis of craniomaxillary components of class Ⅱ division 1 malocclusion

Cephalometric analysis of chin soft tissue on Angle Class Ⅱ1 malocclusion with different vertical skeletal craniofacial patterns

Comparison of Craniofacial Proportion Indices Between Skeletal Class II and Normal Adults

Cranial base morphology in subjects with Class Ⅲ malocclusion

The Investigation of the Molar Inclination of Angle's Class III Malocclusion with Different Vertical Facial Types

The Investigation of the Molar Inclination of Angle's Class Ⅲ Malocclusion with Different Vertical Facial Types

Three-dimensional Phenotype Characteristics of Skeletal Class III Malocclusion in Adult Chinese: a Principal Component Analysis–based Cluster Analysis

[Clinical Analysis of Two-Phase Treatment of 35 Cases with Angle Class II Division 1 Malocclusion].

Assessing cervical spine and craniofacial morphology in Class II and Class III malocclusions: A geometric morphometric approach

Cone-beam Computed Tomography-based Three-Dimensional Cephalometric Analysis of Mandible Symmetry and the Occlusal Plane of Adult Patients with High-Angle Skeletal Class III Malocclusion and Jaw Deformity

[Reliability Evaluation for Thirteen Parameters Describing Anteroposterior Apical Base Relationship in Angle Class II Division 1 Patients].

[Study of Facial Soft Tissue Profile on Angle Class II Malocclusion with Various Vertical Growth Patterns].

Study of Cranioficial Structure by Anteroposterior Cephalometric Analysis in Skeletal Class Ⅲ Patients