Research Article

Evaluation of Tweed Cephalometric Analysis Measurements in Different Malocclusion Types: A Cross-sectional Study

Volume: 28 Number: 3 September 30, 2025
TR EN

Evaluation of Tweed Cephalometric Analysis Measurements in Different Malocclusion Types: A Cross-sectional Study

Abstract

Objective: This study aims to evaluate the relationship and differences in Tweed cephalometric analysis measurements according to malocclusion type and gender in individuals with different dental and skeletal malocclusions. A secondary aim is to contribute to the establishment of reference values for the Turkish population. Material-Methods: This retrospective study included cephalometric radiographs of 200 individuals, with an equal number of males and females in each dental malocclusion group (50 individuals per group). Dental malocclusion was classified according to Angle’s classification (Class I, Class II division 1, Class II division 2, Class III). In contrast, skeletal malocclusion was classified based on the ANB angle (Class I, Class II, Class III). The FMA, FMIA, and IMPA angles, which are part of the cephalometric analysis proposed by Tweed, were measured. Statistical analyses of dental and skeletal malocclusion, gender, and their interactions were conducted using MANOVA analysis. Results: The FMA angle did not differ significantly based on dental or skeletal malocclusion. The FMIA angle was similar in individuals with dental and skeletal Class I and Class II malocclusions but significantly lower in Class III individuals (p<0.05). The IMPA angle was lowest in Class III individuals and highest in Class II individuals for both dental and skeletal malocclusions (p<0.05). No significant differences in Tweed cephalometric analysis measurements were observed between genders. Conclusion: The mean FMA angle obtained in this study was similar to the values proposed by Tweed, whereas the mean FMIA and IMPA angles differed. While the FMA angle did not vary according to dental and skeletal malocclusion, the FMIA and IMPA angles showed significant differences.

Keywords

Supporting Institution

None.

Ethical Statement

Ethics committee approval was received for this study from the Clinical Research Ethics Committee of XXX University (Date: 31.01.2024, Number: 2024/64). The study was carried out in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki, and informed consent forms were obtained from all individuals at the beginning of the study.

Thanks

Support was received from the artificial intelligence-based ChatGPT (Ver. 4.0, OpenAI. (2025). ChatGPT [Large language model]. https://chatgpt.com) application in the proofreading phase of the relevant article and in creating graphics.

References

  1. 1. Proffit W, Sarver D, Fields Jr H. In: Proffit W, Larson B, Sarver D, Fields Jr H (eds). Orthodontic diagnosis: The problem-oriented approach. Contemporary orthodontics. 6th ed. Elsevier; c2019:140-208.
  2. 2. Dinesh A, Mutalik S, Feldman J, Tadinada A. Value-addition of lateral cephalometric radiographs in orthodontic diagnosis and treatment planning. Angle Orthod 2020;90:665-671.
  3. 3. Vaden JL, Klontz HA. Tweed Analysis. In: Jacobson A, Jacobson RL (eds). Radiographic Cephalometry - From Basics to 3-D Imaging, Second Edition. 2nd ed. Quintessence Publishing Co, Inc; c2006:188-204.
  4. 4. Ülgen M. Ortodonti: Anomaliler, Sefalometri, Etioloji, Büyüme ve Gelişim, Tanı. 4. Baskı. Ankara Üniversitesi Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi Yayınları; c2010.
  5. 5. Kumari S, Bapat SM, Gupta K, Thomas B. Comparative evaluation of Tweed's analyses in Class I, Class II, and Class III participants of Central India: A pilot study. Int J Orthod Rehabil 2019;10:70-74.
  6. 6. Yağcı A, Büyük SK. Dengeli Yüz Oranlarına ve Normal Oklüzyona Sahip Genç Türk Erişkinlerin Mcnamara Sefalometrik Normları. Sağlık Bilimleri Dergisi 2013;22:1-6.
  7. 7. Wahl N. Orthodontics in 3 millennia. Chapter 8: The cephalometer takes its place in the orthodontic armamentarium. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2006;129:574-580.
  8. 8. Ajisafe OA, Ogunbanjo BO, Adegbite KO, Oyapero A. Evaluation of Tweed’s Facial Triangle among Students in Lagos, Nigeria. Orthod Journ Nepal 2020;10:32-39.

Details

Primary Language

English

Subjects

Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopaedics

Journal Section

Research Article

Publication Date

September 30, 2025

Submission Date

February 12, 2025

Acceptance Date

August 17, 2025

Published in Issue

Year 2025 Volume: 28 Number: 3

EndNote
Irgın C, Öztürk T, Daşdelen MM, Çoban G (September 1, 2025) Evaluation of Tweed Cephalometric Analysis Measurements in Different Malocclusion Types: A Cross-sectional Study. Cumhuriyet Dental Journal 28 3 341–348.

Cumhuriyet Dental Journal (Cumhuriyet Dent J, CDJ) is the official publication of Cumhuriyet University Faculty of Dentistry. CDJ is an international journal dedicated to the latest advancement of dentistry. The aim of this journal is to provide a platform for scientists and academicians all over the world to promote, share, and discuss various new issues and developments in different areas of dentistry. First issue of the Journal of Cumhuriyet University Faculty of Dentistry was published in 1998. In 2010, journal's name was changed as Cumhuriyet Dental Journal. Journal’s publication language is English.


CDJ accepts articles in English. Submitting a paper to CDJ is free of charges. In addition, CDJ has not have article processing charges.

Frequency: Four times a year (March, June, September, and December)

IMPORTANT NOTICE

All users of Cumhuriyet Dental Journal should visit to their user's home page through the "https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/user" " or "https://dergipark.org.tr/en/user" links to update their incomplete information shown in blue or yellow warnings and update their e-mail addresses and information to the DergiPark system. Otherwise, the e-mails from the journal will not be seen or fall into the SPAM folder. Please fill in all missing part in the relevant field.

Please visit journal's AUTHOR GUIDELINE to see revised policy and submission rules to be held since 2020.