Correlation between the three-dimensional maxillomandibular complex parameters and pharyngeal airway dimensions in different sagittal and vertical malocclusions

Abstract

Objectives: This study aimed to determine the three-dimensional (3D) correlation between maxillomandibular complex parameters and pharyngeal airway dimensions in different sagittal and vertical malocclusions. Methods: This retrospective cross-sectional study included the CBCT scans of 368 patients with a mean age of 23.81 ± 3.01 years. The patients were classified into three groups (skeletal Class I, II, and III). Each class group was divided into three subgroups based on vertical growth patterns (hypo-, normo-, and hyperdivergent). The maxillomandibular complex was evaluated in the three planes using 16 skeletal measurements. Naso-, oro-, hypo-, and total pharyngeal airway spaces were assessed in terms of width, volume, surface area, and minimum constricted area (MCA). Two-way ANOVA followed by the Bonferroni post-hoc test were used. Results: The nasopharyngeal airway space was significantly lowest regarding sagittal and lateral widths in the skeletal Class III patients, the lowest volume and surface area were in hyperdivergent patients, and MCA was the highest in Class II and hypodivergent patients. The oro- and hypopharyngeal sagittal width, volume, surface area, and MCA were the lowest in the hyperdivergent patients, and oropharyngeal lateral width and hypopharyngeal sagittal width were the highest in skeletal Class III. The total pharyngeal volume, surface area, and MCA were the lowest in the hyperdivergent patients, and skeletal Class II patients had the lowest MCA. Conclusions: The pharyngeal airway dimensions differ with various sagittal and vertical malocclusions. These differences could apply to diagnosis, treatment planning, and possible changes following orthodontic/orthopedic or surgical treatment.

Long-term Evaluation (10 Years) of the Outcomes of Herbst Functional Appliance in Pharyngeal Dimensions and Hyoid Bone Position in the Treatment of Class II Patients

“…The relationship between sagittal skeletal pattern and airway space has been the subject of several studies, and the different anteroposterior skeletal patterns in uence airway dimensions. [3,4] Compared to children with normal occlusions, children with skeletal Class II malocclusion have signi cantly smaller nasopharyngeal dimensions [5] and have a higher risk of future respiratory problems. [4] Functional Appliances (FAs) are routinely used to treat children with Class II skeletal malocclusion due to mandibular retrognathism [6], and it may help increase the airway dimensions, preventing respiratory disorders.…”

“…[3,4] Compared to children with normal occlusions, children with skeletal Class II malocclusion have signi cantly smaller nasopharyngeal dimensions [5] and have a higher risk of future respiratory problems. [4] Functional Appliances (FAs) are routinely used to treat children with Class II skeletal malocclusion due to mandibular retrognathism [6], and it may help increase the airway dimensions, preventing respiratory disorders. [7] Thus, in some cases, orthodontic treatment can be chosen that improves not only the maxillomandibular relationship but also reduces the risk of acquiring Obstructive Sleep Apnea Syndrome (OSAS).…”