Acta Scientific Dental Sciences (ASDS)(ISSN: 2581-4893)

Research Article Volume 5 Issue 3

The Upper and Lower Pharyngeal Airway Widths in Different Sagittal and Vertical Craniofacial Patterns Among a Sample of Sudanese Adults

Alaa M Abdalla1 and Amal H Abuaffan2*

1Orthodontist, Faculty of Dentistry, Department of Orthodontics, Pedodontics and Preventive Dentistry, University of Khartoum, Sudan
2Professor, Department of Orthodontics, Pedodontics and Preventive Dentistry, University of Khartoum Sudan

*Corresponding Author: Amal H Abuaffan, Professor, Department of Orthodontics, Pedodontics and Preventive Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Khartoum, Sudan.

Received: November 13, 2020; Published: February 02, 2021

×

Abstract

Objective: This study is aimed at producing norms for the Pharyngeal airway space in subjects with skeletal Class 1 and normal vertical relation and at the unveiling of constrictions related to skeletal morphology.

Materials and Method: The study sample consisted of 106 healthy untreated subjects (male=35 and female=71), ages ranging from 17 to 25 years old. The subjects were grouped according to ANB angle and their vertical relation. The cephalometric films were traced manually and analyzed using Mc Namara analysis of Upper and Lower pharyngeal airway spaces (UPA and LPA). Norms were obtained and the sizes of UPA and LPA compared in different sagittal and vertical relations.

Results: The mean and standard deviation of UPA 11.52 +-2.58mm and LPA 10.33 +- 2.96.mm. UPA and LPA showed no differences between Class 1 and Class 2 skeletal sagittal relation, and skeletal Class 1 Normodivergent and Hyperdivergent groups. The LPA width was significantly constricted in the Class 2 Hyperdivergent group. (p value 0.039), with positive functional relation with SNA and SNB angle. The UPA was unaffected.

Conclusion: The UPA and LPA widths were similar in Skeletal class 1 subjects including both vertical relations. The LPA was found to be significantly constricted in Skeletal class 2 Hyperdivergent subjects confirming to the preconceived notion of their constriction in the literature. These subjects maybe at risk of respiratory problems with retrusive oriented treatment modalities and sleep apnea.

Keywords: Lower Pharyngeal Airway; Pharyngeal Airway Space; Sagittal Relation; Upper Pharyngeal Airway; Vertical Relation

×

References

  1. McNamara JA. “Influence of respiratory pattern on craniofacial growth”. The Angle Orthodontist4 (1981): 269-300.
  2. Moss ML. “The functional matrix: functional cranial components”. Vistas in Orthodontics (1962): 85-98.
  3. 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 2 (1998): 135-139.
  4. 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 Maxillofacial Surgery3 (2008): 228-231.
  5. Lopatienė K., et al. “Vertical and sagittal morphology of the facial skeleton and the pharyngeal airway”. Stomatologija 1 (2016): 21-25.
  6. Indriksone I and Jakobsone G. “The upper airway dimensions in different sagittal craniofacial patterns: a systematic review”. Stomatologija4 (2014): 109-117.
  7. Claudino LV., et al. “Pharyngeal airway characterization in adolescents related to facial skeletal pattern: a preliminary study”. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics6 (2013): 799-809.
  8. Memon S., et al. “Comparison of different craniofacial patterns with pharyngeal widths”. Journal of the College of Physicians and Surgeons Pakistan5 (2012): 302.
  9. de Freitas MR., et al. “Upper and lower pharyngeal airways in subjects with Class I and Class II malocclusions and different growth patterns”. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics6 (2006): 742-745.
  10. Malkoc S., et al. “Reproducibility of airway dimensions and tongue and hyoid positions on lateral cephalograms”. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics4 (2005): 513-516.
  11. Tso HH., et al. “Evaluation of the human airway using cone-beam computerized tomography”. Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathology, Oral Radiology, and Endodontology 5 (2009): 768-776.
  12. Bhatial SS., et al. “Nasopharyngeal Airway Dimensions in Different Dentofacial Skeletal Patterns”. Journal of Health Sciences3 (2018): 30-35.
  13. Samman N., et al. “Cephalometric norms for the upper airway in a healthy Hong Kong Chinese population”. Hong Kong Medical Journal9 (2003)25-30.
  14. Bhatia S., et al. “Effect of retraction of anterior teeth on pharyngeal airway and hyoid bone position in Class I bimaxillary dentoalveolar protrusion”. Medical Journal Armed Forces India 72 (2016): 17-23.
  15. Chen F., et al. “Effects of bimaxillary surgery and mandibular setback surgery on pharyngeal airway measurements in patients with Class III skeletal deformities”. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics3 (2007): 372-377.
  16. Jakobsone G., et al. “The effect of maxillary advancement and impaction on the upper airway after bimaxillary surgery to correct Class III malocclusion”. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics4 (2011): e369-376.
  17. Sosa FA., et al. “Postpharyngeal lymphoid tissue in Angle Class I and Class II malocclusions”. American Journal of Orthodontics4 (1982): 299-309.
  18. Ceylan I and Oktay H. “A study on the pharyngeal size in different skeletal patterns”. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 1 (1995): 69-75.
  19. Abu Allhaija ES and Al-Khateeb SN. “Uvulo-glosso-pharyngeal dimensions in different anteroposterior skeletal patterns”. The Angle Orthodontist6 (2005): 1012-1028.
  20. Grauer D., et al. “Pharyngeal airway volume and shape from cone-beam computed tomography: relationship to facial morphology”.
  21. El H and Palomo JM. “Airway volume for different dentofacial skeletal patterns”. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics6 (2011): e511-521.
  22. Bollhalder J., et al. “Dentofacial and upper airway characteristics of mild and severe class II division 1 subjects”. The European Journal of Orthodontics4 (2013): 447-453.
  23. Zheng ZH., et al. “Three‐dimensional evaluation of upper airway in patients with different anteroposterior skeletal patterns”. Orthodontics and Craniofacial Research1 (2014): 38-48.
  24. Bhatial SS., et al. “Nasopharyngeal Airway Dimensions in Different Dentofacial Skeletal Patterns”. Journal of Health Sciences3 (2018): 30-35.
  25. Uçar Fİ and Uysal T. “Orofacial airway dimensions in subjects with Class I malocclusion and different growth patterns”. The Angle Orthodontist3 (2011): 460-468.
  26. Alcazar NM., et al. “A Comparative cephalometric study of the naso and oropharyngeal space in malocclusions Class I and Class II Division 1, without orthodontic treatment with different growth patterns”. Revista Dental Press de Ortodontia e Ortopedia Facial4 (2004): 68-76.
  27. Celikoglu M., et al. “Comparison of pharyngeal airway volume among different vertical skeletal patterns: a cone-beam computed tomography study”. The Angle Orthodontist5 (2014): 782-787.
  28. BATOOL I., et al. “Comparison of upper and lower pharyngeal airway space in class II high and low angle cases”. Pakistan Oral and Dental Journal1 (2010).
  29. Alves Jr M., et al. “Evaluation of pharyngeal airway space amongst different skeletal patterns”. International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery 7 (2012): 814-819.
  30. Kikuchi Y. “Three-dimensional relationship between pharyngeal airway and maxillo-facial morphology”. The Bulletin of Tokyo Dental College2 (2008): 65-75.
×

Citation

Citation: Alaa M Abdalla and Amal H Abuaffan. “The Upper and Lower Pharyngeal Airway Widths in Different Sagittal and Vertical Craniofacial Patterns Among a Sample of Sudanese Adults”. Acta Scientific Dental Sciences 5.3 (2021): 02-11.




Metrics

Acceptance rate33%
Acceptance to publication20-30 days
Impact Factor0.614

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 June 25, 2021.
  • 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