# A Comparative Analysis of Arch Widths in Class I and Class II Malocclusion: Extraction vs. Non-extraction Treatment

## TL;DR

This study compares changes in dental arch widths before and after extraction and non-extraction treatments for Class I and Class II malocclusions.

## Contribution

The study provides new insights into how extraction and non-extraction treatments affect arch widths in different malocclusion types.

## Key findings

- Extraction cases in Class I malocclusion showed significant increases in inter-canine and molar widths post-treatment.
- Class II non-extraction cases exhibited increased upper and lower inter-canine arch widths after treatment.
- Intermolar arch widths remained largely unchanged across all treatment groups.

## Abstract

Introduction: This study aimed to assess and compare dental arch widths in the anterior and posterior regions among patients undergoing extraction and non-extraction treatments for Class I and Class II malocclusions.

Materials and methodology: A total of 40 patients were selected, with 10 in each of the categorized groups based on malocclusion type and treatment status. Dental arch widths were meticulously measured using a digital Vernier caliper at the canine and molar regions to ensure precise data collection.

Results: Statistically significant differences were noted when comparing mean inter-canine and molar widths between pre- and post-treatment periods among extraction cases in Class I malocclusion (p < 0.001). Conversely, there were no significant changes observed in arch widths among non-extraction cases in Class I malocclusion. Similarly, significant changes were observed in both extraction and non-extraction cases of Class II malocclusion when comparing mean inter-canine and molar widths between pre- and post-treatment periods (p < 0.05).

Conclusion: After treatment, both Class I and Class II extraction cases showed an increase in inter-canine arch width, while intermolar arch width remained unchanged, suggesting that the treatment did not significantly alter the buccal corridor. Additionally, there were no notable changes in inter-canine arch widths between pre- and post-treatment in Class I non-extraction cases. However, the Class II non-extraction group exhibited increased upper and lower inter-canine arch widths after treatment.