ArticleClinical oral investigations2023
Outcome differences after orthodontic camouflage treatment in hypo- and hyperdivergent patients - A retrospective cephalometric investigation.
Article in Clinical oral investigations, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Expert consensus on orthodontic treatment of protrusive facial deformities.International journal of oral science · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo compare differences in outcome in skeletal and dental parameters in hypo- and hyperdivergent Class II patients after extraction of upper first premolars and comprehensive orthodontic treatment. MATERIALS AND
methods37 Class-II-patients with dental camouflage treatment were divided into a hypo- (n = 18) or a hyperdivergent (n = 19) group depending on the mandibular plane angle (hypo: < 34° or hyper: ≥ 34°). Lateral cephalograms were available before (T1) and after (T2) treatment and were analyzed with customized measurements. Data from a growth survey served as a control and were used to calculate the actual treatment effect. Data were analyzed by one-sample Student's t-tests and independent Student's t-tests. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05.
resultsThe measurements showed similar changes in both groups. The effects were mainly dentoalveolar. Hypodivergent patients showed an almost equal increase in anterior and posterior facial height, while hyperdivergent patients only showed an increase in anterior facial height.
conclusionsIn hyperdivergent patients, the anterior facial height increases despite camouflage treatment. This indicates a tendency towards bite opening and backward rotation of the mandible. Hypodivergent patients do not experience deepening of the bite. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: In hyperdivergent patients with upper first premolars extraction the anterior facial height increased differently than in hypodivergent patients. This should be considered if a bite opening is a possible contraindication to treatment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.