A retrospective cephalometric study on upper airway spaces in different facial types

8Citations
Citations of this article
64Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Background: Craniofacial growth pattern has been correlated with variations in size of the upper airway spaces. The objective of this study was to evaluate the nasopharyngeal, oropharyngeal, and hypopharyngeal airway spaces variations according to the craniofacial growth pattern, by comparing brachyfacial, mesofacial, and dolichofacial in Angle Class I individuals. Methods: To measure the spaces, 45 lateral teleradiographs were used and divided into 3 groups per the craniofacial growth pattern, determined by the Tweed cephalometry angular measurements: FMA and Y-axis. To evaluate the airways, sleep apnea cephalometry was used, containing 28 points that compose 14 factors. Three groups were compared relative to each of the 14 sleep apnea cephalometry measurements. Adherence test to the normal curve was performed. For the non-normally distributed data—measurement of the inferior pharyngeal space—the Kruskal-Wallis test was used for comparison between the groups. For the remaining data, the distribution was normal and ANOVA test was used. Results: Statistically significant difference was verified among the groups for the measurement of the median posterior-palatal space, with the difference being pointed out by the post hoc test between the brachyfacial and dolichofacial groups. For the other measurements, there was no statistically significant difference. Conclusions: It could be concluded that there was difference in the median posterior-palatal space measurement, in the oropharynx region, which was reduced for individuals with a dolichofacial pattern.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Sprenger, R., Martins, L. A. C., dos Santos, J. C. B., de Menezes, C. C., Venezian, G. C., & Degan, V. V. (2017). A retrospective cephalometric study on upper airway spaces in different facial types. Progress in Orthodontics, 18(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40510-017-0180-2

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