xx posterior(PAS), superoposterior(SPAS), middle(MAS), inferior(IAS), epiglottic(EAS) airway spaces. Intraclass evaluation was performed with Paired sample t-test and Wilcoxon's test. Interclass comparisons were evaluated with ANOVA and Tukey test for cephalometric changes while Welch ANOVA and Kruskal-Wallis tests were performed for airway changes. Pairwise comparisons of airway parameters were made with Mann-Whitney u-test with Bonferroni correction. Pearson correlation analysis was performed to evaluate relationship between primary predictor and outcome variables.Results: Maxillary-height, palatal-plane, SNA, SNB, ANB, Wits, N-Perp, maxillary-depth changed significantly in total sample. Changes in Mandibular-plane and SNB were higher in Group-1 (p<0.05). Changes in SNA, N-PERP, maxillary-depth were higher in Group-3 (p<0.05). In total sample, PAS (mean:2.44±2.21mm; median:2.17mm) and SPAS (mean:1.07±2.31mm; median:1.14mm) showed highly significant increase. In Group-1, IAS decreased significantly (mean:-1.98±3.68mm; median:-1.36mm). Group-2 had no significant pharyngeal changes. In Group-3, PAS (mean:3.03±2.20mm, median:2.63mm) and SPAS (mean:1.64±1.81mm, median: 1,74mm) increased significantly. Total sample revealed significant positive linear weak relationship between PAS and SNA (r=0.335);. Group-3 had significant positive linear moderate relationship existed between PAS and SNA measurements (r=0.613).Conclusion: Differential maxillomandibular movements showed distinctly different effects on anteroposterior dimensions of upper airway. Clinicians should prepare surgery planning carefully, considering its effects on the airway.

No abstract