What question did this study set out to answer?

This research aims to understand how extraction versus non-extraction orthodontic treatments affect three-dimensional palatal morphology and associated dentoalveolar changes in Class II malocclusion.

February 2, 2026Open Access

Three dimensional palatal morphology and dentoalveolar differences after extraction and non extraction treatment in class II malocclusion

Key Points

This research aims to understand how extraction versus non-extraction orthodontic treatments affect three-dimensional palatal morphology and associated dentoalveolar changes in Class II malocclusion.
Retrospective analysis of 69 post-pubertal patients treated with fixed appliances.
Patients subdivided into extraction (n = 34) and non-extraction (n = 35) groups.
Palatal volume and surface area measured using 3D digital model analysis.
Dentoalveolar outcomes assessed using cephalometric variables from lateral radiographs.
Statistical comparisons performed using non-parametric tests and multivariable regression analyses.
Significant maxillary incisor protrusion noted in non-extraction protocols.
Retrusion of incisors observed in extraction protocols.
Overall increase in anterior palatal volume and surface area across all groups.
Measurable differences found in total palatal volume and surface area between treatment strategies.
Skeletal changes were minimal and comparable across extraction and non-extraction groups.

Abstract

Abstract Digital technologies have transformed orthodontics by enabling precise three-dimensional (3D) assessment of treatment outcomes; however, the effects of extraction versus non-extraction strategies on palatal morphology in Class II malocclusions remain underexplored. This study quantified segmental palatal volume and surface changes, along with skeletal–dentoalveolar outcomes, using digital model analysis integrated with cephalometrics. Records of 69 post-pubertal patients treated with fixed appliances (Class II, n = 34; Class I controls, n = 35) were retrospectively analyzed, each subdivided into extraction and non-extraction protocols. Maxillary casts were scanned with Sirona inEos X5 and segmented in Materialise 3-Matic to compute palatal volume and surface area, while cephalometric variables were derived from lateral radiographs (Dolphin Imaging). Group comparisons were performed using non-parametric tests ( p < 0.05). Multivariable regression analyses were conducted to identify dentoalveolar predictors of palatal remodeling. Intra-examiner repeatability was excellent, as indicated by a high intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC ≥ 0.90). Skeletal changes were minimal and comparable across groups. Dentoalveolar findings demonstrated significant maxillary incisor protrusion in non-extraction protocols and retrusion in extraction protocols ( p < 0.05). Anterior palatal volume and surface area increased across all groups. Overall, measurable differences in total palatal volume and surface area were observed between extraction and non-extraction treatment strategies. Regression analyses indicated that sagittal dentoalveolar displacement was associated with palatal remodeling, whereas angular and vertical dental variables showed limited independent influence. Extraction and non-extraction treatment protocols were associated with measurable differences in three-dimensional palatal volume and surface area, reflecting distinct dentoalveolar and palatal remodeling patterns between treatment strategies.

Read Full Paperexternally

Perguntar à IA

Bookmark

View Full Paper