Patcharapan Paopramote

Joma Saengkaew

Supeepan Boonyaratanasoontorn

Keywords :

ramal height, gonial angle, Pell and Gregory’s classification, Winter’s classification

Abstract :

The aim of the research was to compare the mean measurements of the ramal height
and gonial angle among the groups of third molar classified by Pell and Gregory’s and Winter’s
classification. The measurements were done on the panoramic radiographs that included third
molars on both sides of 338 patients, ages between 18-30 years. The samples were grouped into
class, depth and angulations of the third molar. The comparisons of ramal height and gonial angle
among each group were done using Kruskal Wallis test and one-way ANOVA. The average ramal
height was 38.6 ± 4.16 millimeters. The average gonial angle was 121.8 ± 7.58 degrees. The third
molars in class II, depth A and mesioangular positions were most commonly observed. The
comparative analysis found the ramal heights and gonial angles were not different among the
groups of the third molar classified by Pell and Gregory’s and Winter’s classification.

References :

Capelli J Jr. Mandibular growth and third molar impaction
in extraction cases. Angle Orthod. 1991;61:223-9.

Jeevitha JY, Thiagarajan A, Sivalingam B. Influence and
impact of mandibular ramal dimensions on the incidence
of lower third Molar impaction: a prospective study. J
Pharm Bioallied Sci. 2022;14:364-8.

Al-Gunaid TH, Bukhari AK, El Khateeb SM, Yamaki M. Rela
tionship of mandibular ramus dimensions to lower third
molar impaction. Eur J Dent. 2019;13:213-21.

Richardson ME. The etiology and prediction of mandibular
third molar impaction. Angle Orthod. 1977;47:165-72.

Barone S, Antonelli A, Averta F, Diodati F, Muraca D, Ben
nardo F, et al. Does mandibular gonial angle influence
the eruption pattern of the lower third molar? A three-
dimensional study. J Clin Med. 2021;10:4057.

Gümrükçü Z, Balaban E, Karabağ M. Is there a relationship
between third-molar impaction types and the dimensional/
angular measurement values of posterior mandible ac-
cording to Pell & Gregory/Winter classification? Oral Radiol.
2021;37:29-35.

Kugelberg CF. Periodontal healing two and four years after
impacted lower third molar surgery. A comparative retro
spective study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1990;19:341-5.

Carvalho RW, do Egito Vasconcelos BC. Assessment of
factors associated with surgical difficulty during removal
of impacted lower third molars. J Oral Maxillofac Surg.
2011;69:2714-21.

Kugelberg CF, Ahlström U, Ericson S, Hugoson A, Kvint S.
Periodontal healing after impacted lower third molar surgery
in adolescents and adults. A prospective study. Int J Oral
Maxillofac Surg. 1991;20:18-24.

Broadbent BH, The influence of the third molars on the alignment
of the teeth. Am J Orthod Oral Surg. 1943;29:312-30.

Björk AJE, Palling M. Mandibular growth and third molar
impaction. Acta Odont Scand. 1956;14:231-71.

Mattila K, Altonen M, Haavikko K. Determination of the
gonial angle from the orthopantomogram. Angle Orthod.
1977;47:107-10.

Bhullar MK, Uppal AS, Kochhar GK, Chachra S, Kochhar AS.
Comparison of gonial angle determination from cephalo
grams and orthopantomogram. Indian J Dent. 2014;5:123-6.

Radhakrishnan PD, Sapna Varma NK, Ajith VV. Dilemma of
gonial angle measurement: panoramic radiograph or lateral
cephalogram. Imaging Sci Dent. 2017;47:93-7.

Lemes CR, Tozzi CF, Gribl S, Gribel BF, Venezian GC, do Carmo
Menezes C, et al. Mandibular ramus height and condyle
distance asymmetries in individuals with different facial
growth patterns: a cone-beam computed tomography
study. Surg Radiol Anat. 2021;43:267-74.

Riddle PC, Nickel JC, Liu Y, Gonzalez YM, Gallo LM, Conley
RS, et al. Mechanobehavior and mandibular ramus length
in different facial phenotypes. Angle Orthod. 2020;90:
866-72.

Ahila SC, Sasikala C, Kumar BM, Tah R, Abinaya K. Evaluation
of the correlation of ramus height, gonial angle, and dental
height with different facial forms in individuals with deep
bite disorders. Ann Med Health Sci Res. 2016;6:232-8.

Hattab FN, Alhaija ES. Radiographic evaluation of mandib
ular third molar eruption space. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral
Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 1999;88:285-91.

Björk A, Skieller V. Facial development and tooth eruption.
An implant study at the age of puberty. Am J Orthod. 1972;
62:339-83.

Björk A, Skieller V. Normal and abnormal growth of the
mandible. A synthesis of longitudinal cephalometric implant
studies over a period of 25 years. Eur J Orthod. 1983;5:1-46.

Demirel O, Akbulut A. Evaluation of the relationship be
tween gonial angle and impacted mandibular third molar
teeth. Anat Sci Int. 2020;95:134-42.

Costello BJ, Rivera RD, Shand J, Mooney M. Growth and de-
velopment considerations for craniomaxillofacial surgery.
Oral Maxillofac Surg Clin North Am. 2012;24:377-96.

Bastir M, Rosas A, O’higgins P. Craniofacial levels and the
morphological maturation of the human skull. J Anat. 2006;
209:637-54.

Rabea AA. Recent advances in understanding theories of
eruption (evidence based review article). Future Dent J.
2018;4:189-96.

Bastos VC, Gomez RS, Gomes CC. Revisiting the human
dental follicle: from tooth development to its associa-
tion with unerupted or impacted teeth and pathological
changes. Dev Dyn. 2022;251:408-23.

Roberts GJ, Lucas VS, Andiappan M, McDonald F. Dental
age estimation: pattern recognition of root canal widths of
mandibular molars. A novel mandibular maturity marker
at the 18-Year threshold. J Forensic Sci. 2017;62:351-4.

Leversha J, McKeough G, Myrteza A, Skjellrup-Wakefiled
H, Welsh J, Sholapurkar A. Age and gender correlation of
gonial angle, ramus height and bigonial width in dentate
subjects in a dental school in Far North Queensland. J Clin
Exp Dent. 2016;8:e49-54.

Upadhyay RB, Upadhyay J, Agrawal P, Rao NN. Analysis of
gonial angle in relation to age, gender, and dentition status
by radiological and anthropometric methods. J Forensic
Dent Sci. 2012;4:29-33.

Jensen E, Palling M, Mass B. The gonial angle. Am J Orthod.
1954;40:120-33