title: Ethnic differences in dentofacial relationships of Turkish and Saudi young adults with normal occlusions and well-balanced faces.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  The aims of the present study were (1) to determine ethnic differences in craniofacial dimensions between Turkish and Saudi populations and (2) to identify possible gender differences between males and females, based on a sample of untreated young adult subjects with normal occlusions and well-balanced faces.
  
  
  METHODS
  In total, 163 cephalometric radiographs were traced and evaluated to compare untreated adults of Turkish and Saudi ethnicity. The Turkish group comprised 86 subjects; 45 females and 41 males. The Saudi group comprised 77 subjects; 39 females and 38 males. For statistical evaluation, an independent-samples t-test was performed.
  
  
  RESULTS
  The Turkish sample had a more retrognathic maxilla and mandible (p < 0.001 for SNA and SNB) and a more vertical direction of facial development (p < 0.001), with Turkish males having more retrusive lips (p < 0.001). Distinctive ethnic differences were found in craniofacial structures between Turkish and Saudi young adults.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  It is appropriate to consider these aesthetic differences when a Turkish or a Saudi patient is being evaluated during routine diagnosis and treatment planning.
authors: Department of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Izmir Katip Celebi University, Izmir, Turkey ; Department of Pediatric Dentistry and Orthodontics, College of Dentistry, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
authors: Tancan
authors: T
authors: Uysal
authors: Ahmet
authors: A
authors: Yagci
authors: Abdullah M
authors: AM
authors: Aldrees
authors: Esra
authors: E
authors: Ekizer
keywords: Cephalometric norm; Ethnicity; Saudi; Turkish
references: J Orthod. 2001 Dec;28(4):297-300
references: 11709595
references: Am J Orthod. 1982 Aug;82(2):141-9
references: 6961784
references: Eur J Orthod. 2007 Oct;29(5):493-9
references: 17974539
references: Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2003 Apr;123(4):395-400
references: 12695766
references: J Oral Rehabil. 1988 May;15(3):251-5
references: 3164364
references: Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1998 Dec;114(6):698-706
references: 9844211
references: Am J Orthod. 1975 Jul;68(1):67-74
references: 1056145
references: J Dent Res. 1995 Jul;74(7):1389-98
references: 7560390
references: Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2002 Jan;121(1):57-64
references: 11786873
references: Angle Orthod. 2006 Jan;76(1):109-13
references: 16448278
references: Angle Orthod. 1993 Spring;63(1):47-56
references: 8507031
references: Eur J Orthod. 2009 Aug;31(4):449-56
references: 19482876
references: Forensic Sci Int. 2003 Nov 26;137(2-3):160-4
references: 14609652
references: Angle Orthod. 2004 Oct;74(5):640-7
references: 15529499
references: Angle Orthod. 2000 Oct;70(5):393-9
references: 11037000
references: Angle Orthod. 1997;67(5):381-8
references: 9347112
references: Angle Orthod. 2002 Feb;72(1):72-80
references: 11843277
references: Eur J Orthod. 1979;1(1):15-23
references: 296926
references: Saudi Med J. 2000 Aug;21(8):746-50
references: 11423887
references: Br J Orthod. 1987 Nov;14(4):273-9
references: 3481279
references: Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1991 Feb;99(2):122-8
references: 1990821
references: Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1996 Oct;110(4):431-8
references: 8876496
references: J Contemp Dent Pract. 2003 May 15;4(2):60-73
references: 12761590
references: Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2004 Mar;125(3):366-72
references: 15014417