Comparison of Different Sagittal Dysplasia Indicators in a Sample from Syrian Population
International Journal of Biomedical Science and Engineering
Volume 4, Issue 2, April 2016, Pages: 7-12
Received: Jan. 28, 2016; Accepted: Feb. 8, 2016; Published: Mar. 17, 2016
Views 5996      Downloads 257
Sleiman Hassan Ahmad, Department of Orthodontics Faculty of Dentistry, Tishreen University, Lattakia, Syria
Yazan Talat Jahjah, Department of Orthodontics Faculty of Dentistry, Tishreen University, Lattakia, Syria
Article Tools
Follow on us
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.
Sagittal Discrepancy, ANB Angle, Beta Angle, W Angle, YEN Angle, Syrian
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
Copyright © 2016 Authors retain the copyright of this article.
This article is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License ( which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
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.
Cotton WN, Takano WS AND Wong WM. The Downs analysis applied to three other ethnic groups. Angle Orthod 21: 213-220, 1951
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.
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.
Hassan AH. Cephalometric norms for Saudi adults living in the western region of Saudi Arabia. Angle Orthod 76: 109-113, 2006.
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.
Jacobson, A., 1975. The “Wits” appraisal of jaw disharmony. American Journal of orthodontics, 67: 125-138.
Freeman, R. S., 1981. Adjusting ANB angle to reflect the effect of maxillary position. Angle Orthodontist, 51: 162-172.
Richardson, M., 1982. Measurement of dental base relationship. European journal of Orthodontics, 4: 251-256.
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.
Oktay, H., 1991. A comparison of ANB, wits, AF-BF and APDI measurements. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, 99: 122-128.
Jarvinen, S., 1986. Floating norms for the ANB angle as guidance for clinical considerations. American Journal of orthodontics and Dentofacial orthopedics, 90: 383-387.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Braun S, Kittleson R, Kim K 2004. The G-Axis: a growth vector for the mandible. Angle Orthodontist 74: 328–331.
Steiner C. C. cephalometrics for you and me. Am. j. Orthod. 1953; 39: 729.
Steiner C. C. Cephalometrics in clinical practice. Angle Orthod. 1959; 29: 8–29.
Steiner C. C. Cephalometrics as an aid to planning and assessing orthodontic treatment. AJO-DO 1960 Oct (721-735).
Baik CY, Ververidou M: A new approach of assessing sagittal discrepancies: the Beta angle. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 2004; 126: 100-105.
Neela PK, Mascarenhas R, Husain A: A new sagittal dysplasia indicator: the Yen angle. World Journal of Orthodontics 2009; 10: 147-151.
Bhad WA, Nayak S AND Doshi UH: A new approach of assessing sagittal dysplasia: the W angle: European Journal of Orthodontic 2011: 1-5.
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.
Houston W. The analysis of errors in orthodontic measurements. Am J Orthod 83: 382-390, 1983.
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.
Riedel RA. Esthetics and its relation to orthodontic therapy. Angle Orthod 20: 168-178, 1950.
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.
Forsberg C-M AND ODENRICK L. Identification of the cephalometric reference point condylion on lateral head films. Angle Orthod 59: 123-130, 1989.
Purmal K, ALAM MK AND ZAM ZAM NM. Cephalometric Norms of Malaysian Adult Chinese. Int Med J 20: 87-91, 2013.
Coon CS. The races of Europe. NewYork: Macmillan, 1948.
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.
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.
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.
Mohammad Khursheedalam, Irfan Qamruddin, Rina Muraoka, Keisuke Nakano and Norimasa Okafuji. Validity of W Angle and YEN Angle in a Sample from Pakistani and Bangladeshi Populations. J. Hard Tissue Biology Vol. 23(3): 351-356, 2014.
Tanner JM. Foetus into man, physical growth from conception to maturity. 2nd ed, Castlemead Pub, 1989.
Science Publishing Group
1 Rockefeller Plaza,
10th and 11th Floors,
New York, NY 10020
Tel: (001)347-983-5186