DefinePK

Abstract

Objectives: To compare the sagittal position of the lower incisors and facial profile esthetics among sagittal and vertical pattern. Materials and Methods: This comparative study on 229 participants at deparment of Orthodontics, Armed Forcers Institute of Dentistry, Combined Military Hospital, Rawalpindi. Patients aged 20–30 years with no history of  orthodontic treatment and a complete dentition up to the second permanent molars were included, while those with dental anomalies, craniofacial deformities, or a history of head and neck trauma or surgery were excluded. Pretreatment lateral cephalograms were obtained, and age and gender were recorded from patient files. Facial growth patterns were assessed using the SN-MP angle, facial profile convexity using Merrifield’s Z-angle, and lower incisor inclination using the IMPA. Student t-test and ANOVA were used to compare lower incisor inclination and facial profile among vertical and sagittal patterns.Results: Males were 95 (41.5%). IMPA was significantly higher in the high-angle (100± 9.9) than in the low-angle group (94.8±15.320) (p = 0.004), while the Z angle was significantly lower in the high-angle (66.02±7.880) than in the low-angle group (72.07 ± 11.35) (p < 0.001). Signifi cant diff erences in IMPA and Z angle across skeletal classes (p < 0.001), with Class II showing the highest IMPA (108.68 ± 5.54) and lowest Z angle (64.59 ± 7.510), while Class III had the lowest IMPA (66.88 ± 6.630) and highest Z angle (90.12 ± 5.970).Conclusion: High-angle participants had more proclined lower incisors and a retrusive profile, while Class II showed the most proclined incisors and flattest profile.