Partea generala:

-definitie ortodontie

stiinta care se ocupa cu diagnosticul, prevenirea si tratamentul anomaliilor dento-maxilare

-definitie clase angle

The normal non-crowded and crowded samples were compared with two-sample t-test, and changes
from MD to PD with paired-sample t-test. Examiner measurement errors were tested with intra-class
correlation coefficients.

The normal non-crowded and crowded samples were compared with two-sample t-test, and changes
from MD to PD with paired-sample t-test. Examiner measurement errors were tested with intra-class
correlation coefficients.

When the mean sums of the arch lengths [Perimeters] were compared using data from all 60 subjects,
the arch perimeters of the CD and CIN samples did not differ

It was concluded that total arch lengths [Perimeters] were not significant indicators for crowding.

Gender comparisons: Within the CIN group, males had numerically larger tooth width sums and arch
length sums than females

The sum of maxillary and mandibular tooth widths for CIN’s and CD (both males and females)
mandibular tooth widths for CIN’s and CD (both males and females pooled together and sexes
separately. In the MD stage the mean sum of maxillary and mandibular arch lengths in the MD were
significantly greater than those in the PD, because arch perimeters decrease during the transition from
mixed to permanent dentitions.

In summary, the results of this research thesis study showed that the sum of tooth widths in both arches
had a significant association with dental crowding. In contrast, the sum of arch lengths [perimeter in
both arches] did not differ between the normal and iii crowded samples

In summary, the results of this research thesis study showed that the sum of tooth widths in both arches
had a significant association with dental crowding. In contrast, the sum of arch lengths [perimeter in
both arches] did not differ between the normal and iii crowded samples
Dental crowding can occur with (1) very large teeth with a normal arch perimeter, (2) very large teeth
with a very small arch perimeter, and (3) normal sized teeth with a very small arch perimeter.

Two thirds of the crowding subjects according to the above combinations have larger than normal tooth
size, and one third have normal size teeth.

When the combinations for crowding are examined by arch perimeter, two thirds of the crowded
patients have small arch perimeters, and one third have a normal size arch perimeter.

These possible combinations are a mixed bag of normal size teeth and large teeth and normal size arch
perimeter and smaller than normal size arch perimeter

Another complication is that the upper and lower arches by themselves also are independent with 3
regard to arch lengths, arch perimeters, arch widths, and tooth sizes.

The polygenic inheritance of the growth and development of the face and dentition is complex. In
addition, the complexity is a statistical challenge!

The past literature about crowding is interesting in that orthodontists have not recognized the
complexity of crowding malocclusions. Orthodontists want to simplify the crowding problem, but we
must accept and deal with the true complexity of crowding problems in order to best serve our patients
that experience crowding.

If the tooth size, arch widths, and arch length measurements of the crowded sample selected in this
research project differ significantly from those of the non-crowded Class I normal occlusion sample, the
differences may lead to a better understanding of our ability to estimate the crowding potential in the
mixed dentition patient.

The following null hypotheses were tested: 1. That the non-crowded and crowded samples do not differ
(are statistically similar) in the maxillary and mandibular arch length segments and in the maxillary and
mandibular arch perimeters (MxAP) (MdAP) in the mixed and permanent dentitions and in the transition
from MD to PD. 2. That the sum of tooth mesio-distal widths (size) are similar in the noncrowded and
crowded samples, that the samples do not differ in crowding (TSALD) in the MD and PD, and that the
samples do not differ in these variables in the transition from MD to PD. 3. That the sexes do not differ
in arch length segments, arch perimeters, arch widths, tooth size, crowding, and in the transition of
these variables from MD to PD.

Sex differences have been reported by multiple authors in that they all found more dental crowding in
females than in males (La Velle and Foster (1969) Fastlicht (1970) and Foster, et al (1970). he preceding
studies reported that males have 4% larger teeth than females. The greatest difference was found in the
mandibular canines that were 6% larger in males and the least sex difference was found in the
mandibular incisors. These differences were found regardless of race. Therefore, the preceding studies
recommended that in a study of tooth sizes, males and females should be analyzed separately. Mean
mesio-distal tooth size in crowded arches was uniformly larger than those with non-crowded arches

Hunter and Smith (1972) also found that an orthodontist can expect that crowding in the mixed
dentition will likely result in crowding in the permanent dentition. This is an important landmark study
that described the development and longitudinal growth of crowded malocclusions.
Crowding was defined by Van der Linden (1974) as an inherent discrepancy between tooth size and the
available arch length, mainly of genetic origin

Secondary crowding is caused by environmental factors influencing the dentition, such as caries and
extractions.

Tertiary crowding or late crowding occurs in the post-adolescent period.

A number of other articles have also reported a trend toward increased incidence of mandibular incisor
crowding with higher ages in untreated persons (Barrow, 1952)

According to Moyers (1973) the dental arch is measured through the contact points of the teeth and
represents a series of points where the muscle forces acting against the crowns of the teeth are
balanced.The basal arch, is the arch formed by the corpus mandibularis or maxillaris. Its dimensions are
unaltered by the loss of all permanent teeth and the resorption of the alveolar processes. The alveolar
arch is the arcal measurement of the alveolar process. The dimensions of the alveolar arch may not
coincide with those of the basal arch if the teeth are tipped labially off the basal arch

Arya (1974) reported that male teeth are consistently numerically larger than female teeth. Numerical
size does not mean statistically larger.

Teeth in males were numerically larger than in females, but not to a statistically significant level. Doris et
al (1981) recommended that when the cumulative tooth mass of the twenty permanent teeth mesial to
the first molars is 140 mm or more, the orthodontist may want to consider extractions

Doris et al (1981) reported that patients that had extractions had consistently larger teeth and a greater
sum of the mesio-distal tooth widths than the group treated by non-extraction.

Doris et al (1981) found that measurements of maxillary and mandibular incisors, canines, and
premolars were uniformly larger in the group with crowded arches. Doris et al(1981) concluded that an
important factor determining whether or not a dental arch will be crowded is the absolute size of teeth
in that arch.

h. Doris (1981) found that crowding increased with age until the thirteenth or fourteenth year and then
tended to decrease.

Howe and McNamara (1983) drew attention to the fact that crowding can result not only from excessive
tooth size, but also inadequate apical bases

McNamara (1983) studied two samples of dental casts from patients in the permanent dentition, one
with gross dental crowding and one with no crowding to determine the extent to which tooth size and
jaw size contribute to dental crowding. .They found that statistically, the crowded and non-crowded
groups could not be distinguished from one another on the basis of mesio-distal tooth diameters.
However, they found significant differences between the dental arch dimensions of the two samples

The crowded sample was found to have smaller dental arch dimensions than the non-crowded sample.
These results suggested that extra consideration should be given to treatment techniques that increase
dental arch length rather than reduce tooth mass. Howe and McNamara (1983) introduced a formula to
determine whether or not the apical bases of a patient could accommodate the patient’s teeth in the
permanent dentition.
Bishara (1998) studied arch perimeter or circumference measurements that
included the sum of the right and left anterior and posterior segmental arch lengths for the
maxillary and mandibular arches. Bishara reported that arch perimeter continued to
increase until 13 years in the maxillary arch and until 8 years in the mandibular arch