The relationship between upper airways and craniofacial morphology studied in 3D. A CBCT study. (19th September 2014)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Di Carlo, G.; Polimeni, A.; Melsen, B.; Cattaneo, P. M.
• Is Part Of: Orthodontics and craniofacial research. Volume 18:Number 1(2015:Feb.)
• Page Start: 1
• Page End: 11
• Publication Date: 2014-09-19
• Subjects: Skull -- Growth -- Periodicals; Facial bones -- Growth -- Periodicals; Orthodontics -- Periodicals; Orthodontics, Corrective -- Periodicals; Orthodontic appliances -- Periodicals; 617.51
• DOI: 10.1111/ocr.12053
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1601-6335

Abstract

<abstract abstract-type="main" id="ocr12053-abs-0001"> <title>Structured Abstract</title> <sec id="ocr12053-sec-0001" sec-type="section"> <title>Objectives</title> <p>To assess whether morphology and dimension of the upper airway differ between patients characterized by various craniofacial morphology.</p> </sec> <sec id="ocr12053-sec-0002" sec-type="section"> <title>Setting and Sample Population</title> <p>Ninety young adult patients from the Postgraduate Clinic, Section of Orthodontics, Department of Dentistry, Health, Aarhus University, Denmark, with no obvious signs of respiratory diseases and no previous adeno‐tonsillectomy procedures. Thirty patients were characterized as Class I (−0.5 < ANB < 4.5), 30 as Class II (ANB > 4.5), and 30 as Class III (ANB < −0.5).</p> </sec> <sec id="ocr12053-sec-0003" sec-type="section"> <title>Material and Methods</title> <p>Cone‐beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans obtained in a supine position for all patients. Cephalometric landmarks were identified in 3D. Sagittal and transversal dimensions, cross sections, and partial and total volumes of the upper airway were correlated with the cephalometric measurements in all three planes of space. The cross‐sectional minimal area of the upper airway was assessed as well.</p> </sec> <sec id="ocr12053-sec-0004" sec-type="section"> <title>Results</title> <p>No statistical significant relationships between dimension and morphology of upper airways and skeletal malocclusion were found.</p> </sec> <sec id="ocr12053-sec-0005" sec-type="section"> <title>Conclusion</title> <p>Differences in craniofacial morphology as identified by the sagittal jaw relationship were not correlated with variation in upper airway volumes. A clinical significant relation was detected between minimal area and total upper airway volume.</p> </sec> </abstract>