Differences of upper airway morphology according to obesity: Study with cephalometry and dynamic MD-CT

6Citations
Citations of this article
31Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Objectives. We investigated difference of parameters of polysomnography, cephalometry and dynamic multi-detector computerized tomography (MD-CT) in wake and sleep states according to obesity. Methods. We evaluated 93 patients who underwent polysomnography and cephalometry. MD-CT was performed in 68 of these 93 patients. Fifty-nine and 34 patients were classified as obese and non-obese, with obesity defined as BMI ≥25. Cephalometry results were analyzed for 12 variables. Using the MD-CT, we evaluated dynamic upper airway morphology in wake and sleep states and divided the upper airway into four parts named as high retropalatal (HRP), low retropalatal (LRP), high retroglossal (HRG), and low retroglossal (LRG). A minimal cross sectional area (mCSA) and collapsibility index (CI) were calculated for each airway level. Results. Diastolic blood pressure (P=0.0005), neck circumference (P<0.0001), and apnea-hypopnea index (P<0.0001) were statistically significantly different between the obese and non-obese group. Among 12 cephalometric variables, there was a significant difference in only the distance from mandibular plane to hyoid bone (P=0.003). There was statistical difference in CI of HRG and LRG in sleep state (P=0.0449, 0.0281) but no difference in mCSA in wake and sleep states. Conclusion. The obese group had more severe sleep apnea than the non-obese group. We believe that the increased severity of apnea in the obese group may be have been due to increased collapsibility of the upper airway rather than decreased size of the upper airway. © 2010 by Korean Society of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery.

Author supplied keywords

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Kim, T. H., Chun, B. S., Lee, H. W., & Kim, J. S. (2010). Differences of upper airway morphology according to obesity: Study with cephalometry and dynamic MD-CT. Clinical and Experimental Otorhinolaryngology, 3(3), 147–152. https://doi.org/10.3342/ceo.2010.3.3.147

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free