Acta Scientific Dental Sciences (ISSN: 2581-4893)

Research Article Volume 4 Issue 11

Cephalometric Evaluation of Main Airway Dimensions in Subjects with Different Growth Patterns and their Relation to Patients’ Ages and Genders

Rabaa Mahmoud Aboubakr1*, Nabeela Hassan Almalki2, Sohir Shehata Kamel3, Salah Awad Alanazi4, Saleh Hassan Alqhtani4, Abdullah Ali Almulhim4 and Osama Mesfer Alkhathami4

1Associate Professor of Dental Public Health and Preventive Dentistry, Mansoura University, Mansoura City, Egypt
2Saudi Board of Orthodontic, Ministry of Health, Riyadh, KSA
3Alfarabi College of Dentistry and Nursing, Riyadh, KSA
4Intern Student at Alfarabi College of Dentistry and Nursing, Riyadh, KSA

*Corresponding Author: Rabaa Mahmoud Aboubakr, Associate Professor of Dental Public Health and Preventive Dentistry, Mansoura University, Mansoura City, Egypt.

Received: September 17, 2020; Published: October 28, 2020



Background: Airway shape and dimensions has been attracted attention during the past few decades, this is can be attributed to the relationship between upper airway configuration and sleep-disordered breathing as well as its relation to craniofacial morphology in general.

Objectives: This study was conducted to 1. Compare the pharyngeal dimensions of subjects with different vertical growth patterns. 2. Assess the impact of modifying variables like age, and gender on airway dimensions.

Materials and Methods: Data collection was based on both cephalometric radiographs and patients' files analysis. Radiographs were grouped according to patients' ages, genders, and vertical growth pattern. Lateral cephalometric radiographs were taken using a standardized technique. SN-MP angle used to divide the sample into hypodivergent, noromodivergent, hyperdivergent growth patterns with values of < 26°, 26-38°, and >38° respectively as proposed by Isaacson., et al. The upper and lower pharyngeal airways width measured by using McNamara’s airway analysis.

Results: the widest upper and lower pharyngeal widths were found among hypodivergent subjects (20.1 ± 2.3 and 11.6 ± 4) respectively, gender differences were found in upper pharyngeal width but in the lower (17.4 ± 3.4 and 18.1 ± 3.5, 10.1 ± 2.3 and 10.2 ± 3.1) for males and females in upper and lower airways respectively. Increasing subject's ages significantly increased upper pharyngeal width but did not affect lower pharyngeal width.

Conclusion: hypodivergent patients had higher upper and lower pharyngeal width when compared to noromodivergent and hyperdivergent growth patterns. Also the UPW and LPW were slightly higher in females than in males. And increasing the age had significantly increased UPW but did not affect LPW.

Keywords: Cephalometric Radiographs; Age; Gender; Vertical Growth; Airway Dimensions



  1. Lowe AA., et al. “Cephalometric comparisons of craniofacial and upper airway structure by skeletal subtype and gender in patients with obstructive sleep apnea”. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics6 (1996): 653-664.
  2. Ansar J., et al. “Cephalometric evaluation of the airway dimensions in subjects with different growth patterns”. Journal of Orthodontic Research 3 (2015): 108-112.
  3. Eylan İ and Oktay H. "A study on the pharyngeal size in different skeletal patterns”. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics1 (1995): 69-75.
  4. Flores B AP., et al. “Comparison of airway dimensions in skeletal Class I malocclusion subjects with different vertical facial patterns”. Dental Press Journal of Orthodontic 6 (2017): 35‐42.
  5. Iqbal N., et al. “Comparison of different craniofacial patterns with pharyngeal widths”. JKCD 6 (2015): 20-24.
  6. Lakshmi K B., et al. “Comparison between Growth Patterns and Pharyngeal Widths in Different Skeletal Malocclusions in South Indian Population”. Journal of International Society of Preventive and Community Dentistry 8 (2018): 224-228.
  7. Gungor AY and Turkkahraman H. “Effects of airway problems on maxillary growth: a review”. European Journal of Dentistry3 (2009): 250-254.
  8. Memon S., et al. “Comparison of different craniofacial patterns with pharyngeal widths”. Journal of the College of Physicians and Surgeons Pakistan 22 (2012): 302-306.
  9. Chang M S., et al. “Developmental Changes in Pharyngeal Airway Depth and Hyoid Bone Position from Childhood to Young Adulthood”. Angle of Orthodontics3 (2009): 484-490.
  10. Mani P., et al. “Upper and lower pharyngeal airway space in West-Tamil Nadu population”. Journal of Pharmacy and Bioallied Sciences 6 (2015): 539-542.
  11. Steiner C C. “Cephalometric in clinical practice”. Angle of Orthodontics1 (1959): 8-29.
  12. Khouw FE., et al. “Cephalometric evaluation of patients with dentofacial disharmonies requiring surgical correction”. Oral Surgery 29 (1970): 789-798.
  13. Mukaihara K., et al. “Evaluation of the pharyngeal airway using computational fluid dynamics in patients with acromegaly". Laryngoscope Investigation Otolaryngology 3 (2018): 133-138.
  14. Haponik E F., et al. “Computerized tomography in obstructive sleep apnea. Correlation of airway size with physiology during sleep and wakefulness”. American Review of Respiratory Disease 127 (1983): 221-226.
  15. Suratt PM., et al. “Fluoroscopic and computed tomographic features of the pharyngeal airway in obstructive sleep apnea”. American Review of Respiratory Disease 127 (1983): 487-492.
  16. Bradley T D., et al. “Pharyngeal size in snorers, nonsnorers, and in patients with obstructive sleep apnea”. The New England Journal of Medicine 315 (1986): 1327-1331.
  17. Remmers J E., et al. “Pathogenesis of upper airway occlusion during sleep”. Journal of Applied Physiology 44 (1978): 931-938.
  18. Rodenstein D O., et al. “Pharyngeal shape and dimensions in healthy subjects, snorers, and patients with obstructive sleep apnoea”. Thorax 45 (1990): 722-727.
  19. RyuH H., et al. “The usefulness of cephalometric measurement as a diagnostic tool for obstructive sleep apnea syndrome: a retrospective study”. Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathology, and Oral Radiology 119 (2015): 20-31.
  20. Barrera J E., et al. “Anatomic measures of upper airway structures in obstructive sleep apnea”. World Journal of Otorhinolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery 2 (2017): 85-91.
  21. “Polysomnography in patients with obstructive sleep apnea: an evidence-based analysis”. Ontario Health Technology Assessment Series 6 (2006): 1-38.
  22. Maltais F., et al. “Cephalometric measurements in snorers, non-snorers, and patients with sleep apnoea”. Thorax 46 (1991): 419-423.
  23. Pepin JL., et al. “Somnofluoroscopy, computed tomography, and cephalometry in the assessment of the airway in obstructive sleep apnoea”. Thorax 47 (1992): 150-156.
  24. deBerry BB., et al. “Cephalometric analysis for diagnosis and treatment of obstructive sleep apnea”. Laryngoscope 98 (1988): 226-234.
  25. Riley R., et al. “Cephalometric analysis and flow-volume loops in obstructive sleep apnea patients”. Sleep 6 (1983): 303-311.
  26. Riley R W and Powell N B. “Maxillofacial surgery and obstructive sleep apnea syndrome”. Otolaryngologic Clinics of North America 23 (1990): 809-826.
  27. MUTO T., et al. “A cephalometric evaluation of the pharyngeal airway space in patients with mandibular retrognathia and prognathia, and normal subjects”. International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery 37 (2008): 228-231.
  28. Samman N., et al. “Cephalometric norms for the upper airway in a healthy Hong Kong Chinese population”. Citation Hong Kong Medical Journal7 (2003): 25-30.
  29. SIMSEK G., et al. “Blood parameters as indicators of upper airway obstruction in children with adenoid or adenotonsillar hypertrophy”. Journal of Craniofacial Surgery 26 (2015) e213-216.
  30. JOSEPH AA., et al. “A cephalometric comparative study of the soft tissue airway dimensions in persons with hyperdivergent and normodivergent facial patterns”. Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery 56 (1998): 135-139; discussion 139-140.
  31. J A McNamara Jr. “A method of cephalometric evaluation”. American Journal of Orthodontics6 (1984): 449-469.
  32. Solow B and Tallgre A. “Natural head position in standing subjects”. Acta Odontologica Scandinavica 29 (1971): 591-607.
  33. Isaacson J R., et al. “Extreme variation in vertical facial growth and associated variation in skeletal and dental relations”. Angle of Orthodontics 41 (1971): 219-229.
  34. Aboudara C., et al. “Comparison of airway space with conventional lateral headfilms and 3-dimensional reconstruction from cone-beam computed tomography”. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 135 (2009): 468-479.
  35. Ucar F I and Uysal T. “Orofacial airway dimensions in subjects with Class I malocclusion and different growth patterns”. Angle of Orthodontics 81 (2011): 460-468.
  36. , et al. “Comparative study of nasopharyngeal soft-tissue characteristics in patients with Class III malocclusion”. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 139.2 (2011): 242-225.
  37. Daraze A., et al. “Cephalometrics of Pharyngeal Airway Space in Lebanese Adults”. International Journal of Dentistry (2017): 11.
  38. Samman N., et al. “Cephalometric norms for the upper airway in a healthy Hong Kong Chinese population”. Hong Kong Medical Journal1 (2003) 25-30.
  39. Mislik B., et al. “Pharyngeal airway dimensions: a cephalometric, growth-study based analysis of physiological variations in children aged 6-17”. European Journal of Orthodontics 36 (2014): 331-339.
  40. Abramson Z., et al. “Age-related changes of the upper airway assessed by 3-dimensional computed tomography”. Journal of Craniofacial Surgery 20 (2009): 657-663.


Citation: Rabaa Mahmoud Aboubakr., et al. “Cephalometric Evaluation of Main Airway Dimensions in Subjects with Different Growth Patterns and their Relation to Patients’ Ages and Genders". Acta Scientific Dental Sciences 4.11 (2020): 84-90.


Acceptance rate30%
Acceptance to publication20-30 days
Impact Factor1.278

Indexed In

News and Events

  • Certification for Review
    Acta Scientific certifies the Editors/reviewers for their review done towards the assigned articles of the respective journals.
  • Submission Timeline for Upcoming Issue
    The last date for submission of articles for regular Issues is April 30th, 2024.
  • Publication Certificate
    Authors will be issued a "Publication Certificate" as a mark of appreciation for publishing their work.
  • Best Article of the Issue
    The Editors will elect one Best Article after each issue release. The authors of this article will be provided with a certificate of "Best Article of the Issue".
  • Welcoming Article Submission
    Acta Scientific delightfully welcomes active researchers for submission of articles towards the upcoming issue of respective journals.

Contact US