## 2 Materials and Methods
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline \hline  & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Segner-Hasund Analysis**} \\ \hline
**Parameter** & **Norm** & **Deviation** & **Value** \\ \hline SNA & 82\({}^{\circ}\) & \(\pm\)3 & 83.8\({}^{\circ}\) \\ \hline SNB & 80\({}^{\circ}\) & \(\pm\)3 & 76.6\({}^{\circ}\) \\ \hline ANB & 2\({}^{\circ}\) & \(\pm\)2 & 7.2\({}^{\circ}\) \\ \hline SNPg & 81\({}^{\circ}\) & \(\pm\)3 & 76.8\({}^{\circ}\) \\ \hline NSBa & 132\({}^{\circ}\) & \(\pm\)4 & 130.4\({}^{\circ}\) \\ \hline GntgoAr & 122\({}^{\circ}\) & \(\pm\)7 & 121\({}^{\circ}\) \\ \hline NL-NSL & 8\({}^{\circ}\) & \(\pm\)4 & 10.6\({}^{\circ}\) \\ \hline ML-NSL & 28\({}^{\circ}\) & \(\pm\)5 & 30.5\({}^{\circ}\) \\ \hline ML-NL & 20\({}^{\circ}\) & \(\pm\)7 & 20\({}^{\circ}\) \\ \hline H & 9\({}^{\circ}\) & \(\pm\)3 & 19.5\({}^{\circ}\) \\ \hline
1+:1- & 133\({}^{\circ}\) & \(\pm\)8 & 113.3\({}^{\circ}\) \\ \hline
1+NA & 21\({}^{\circ}\) & \(\pm\)4 & 18.2\({}^{\circ}\) \\ \hline
1-NB & 24\({}^{\circ}\) & \(\pm\)4 & 41.3\({}^{\circ}\) \\ \hline nose-lip & 110\({}^{\circ}\) & \(\pm\)7 & 108.4\({}^{\circ}\) \\ \hline Pg:NB & 2.3 mm & \(\pm\)2 & 0.4 mm \\ \hline
1+NA [mm] & 3.7 mm & \(\pm\)2 & 2.6 mm \\ \hline
1-NB [mm] & 3.8 mm & \(\pm\)5 & 9.3 mm \\ \hline Wits & 0 & \(\pm\)2 & 2.1 \\ \hline Index & 80 & \(\pm\)7 & 83.1 \\ \hline \multicolumn{4}{c}{**Prognosis**} \\ \hline  & **Before treatment** & **Prognosis without treatment** & **Prognosis with treatment** \\ \hline ANB & 7.2 & 7.2 & 7.2 \\ \hline Pg:NB [mm] & 0.4 & 0.4 & - \\ \hline
1+NA [mm] & 2.6 & –0.4 & –0.4 \\ \hline
1+NA [\({}^{\circ}\)] & 18.2 & 11.1 & 11.1 \\ \hline
1-NB [mm] & 9.3 & 7 & 7 \\ \hline
1-NB [\({}^{\circ}\)] & 41.3 & 32.9 & 32.9 \\ \hline H & 19.5 & 17.1 & 17.1 \\ \hline  & **Diagnosis** & & \\ \hline  & **Norm** & **Description** & **Value** \\ \hline Skeletal class & 0\({}^{\circ}\)–4\({}^{\circ}\) & II & ANB = 7.2 \\ \hline Skeletal class & \(-2^{\circ}\)–2\({}^{\circ}\) & II & WITS = 2.1 \\ \hline Face type & 79\({}^{\circ}\)–85\({}^{\circ}\) & orthognathic & SNA = 83.8 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 1: Initial cephalometric values. Since both the maxillary and mandibular alveolar process were narrow, retraction of the incisors after extractions could result in contact with the palatal plate and incisive canal, causing undesirable side effects. The patient accepted and understood the need to continuously wear the light elastics necessary for this treatment method. After the initial leveling with 0.014, 0.018, and 0.017 \(\times\) 0.025 NiTi archwires in both arches, the 0.018 \(\times\) 0.025 Gummetal tip-backs were bent at about 60 degrees with an active progressive torque of about 45 degrees. The recommended treatment plan included 24/7 wearing of light 3/16 2.5 oz intermaximillary elastics in the anterior segment, intended to eliminate the intrusive effect of the arches on the anterior segment. There was a very rapid occlusal closure within 3 months (Figure 6). The arches were then aligned with the simultaneous continuation of the elastics to verticalize the roots. In the final stage, straight TMA 0.019 \(\times\) 0.025 arches were used to stabilize the occlusion. The treatment resulted in maximal intercuspation and functional occlusion. The patient did not report any TMJ complaints either during or after treatment. The lateral telerentgenogram of the head, taken after the active phase of treatment, shows improvement in the inclinations of the lower incisors, the inter-incisal angle and rotation of the occlusal plane with verticalization and intrusion of the upper and lower molars (Figure 7, Table 2).