Three-dimensional analysis of pharyngeal airway volume in Class I, II, and III malocclusion
Aim: This study aimed to evaluate pharyngeal airway dimensions using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) in patients with Class I, II, and III malocclusions and normal growth patterns.
Methods: All CBCT images were categorized into three groups: Class I (0° < ANB < 4°, −1 mm < Wits < 0 mm), Class II (ANB > 4°, Wits > 0 mm), and Class III (ANB < 0°, Wits < −1 mm). CBCT images were obtained from individuals with normal growth patterns (32 ± 5° = GN/GO – SN), where GN represents gonion, GN is gnathion, and SN equates to the sella-nasion distance. Measurements were taken for total pharyngeal volume, velopharyngeal volume, glossopharyngeal volume, and oropharyngeal volume, and the narrowest area of the airway was measured. ANOVA and Tukey’s post hoc test were used to compare the airway dimensions among skeletal classes I, II, and III.
Results: The CBCT images were captured from 90 patients (45 males and 45 females) aged 17 to 39. The mean volume of the total pharyngeal airway, velopharyngeal, glossopharyngeal, and oropharyngeal and the most constricted area were significantly greater in patients with skeletal Class III malocclusion compared to patients with skeletal Class II malocclusion showing normal growth pattern. Total pharyngeal airway, velopharyngeal, and oropharyngeal volumes were lower in Class II patients compared to Class I and III patients with normal growth patterns. There was a significant difference in the pharyngeal space between males and females with Class II malocclusion. Pharyngeal space in female Class II malocclusion was higher than that in males. There was no difference regarding airway space between female and male patients with Class 1 malocclusion. Pharyngeal space between females and males with Class III malocclusion showed no difference.
Conclusion: Class III pharyngeal volumes were generally larger in Class I and II malocclusions. Sex differences in the volumes of various pharyngeal spaces were only present in the case of Class II malocclusions.
Relevance for Patients: Class II pharyngeal volumes were generally smaller in Class I and III malocclusions.
[1] Celikoglu M, Bayram M, Sekerci AE, Buyuk SK, Toy E. Comparison of Pharyngeal Airway Volume among Different Vertical Skeletal Patterns: A Cone-beam Computed Tomography Study. Angle Orthod 2014;84:782-7. doi: 10.2319/101013-748.1
[2] Moshiri M, Scarfe WC, Hilgers ML, Scheetz JP, SilveiraAM, Farman AG. Accuracy of Linear Measurements from Imaging Plate and Lateral Cephalometric Images Derived from Cone-beam Computed Tomography. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2007;132:550-60. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2006.09.046
[3] Cattaneo PM, Melsen B. The Use of Cone-beam Computed Tomography in an Orthodontic Department in between Research and Daily Clinic. World J Orthod 2008;9:269-82.
[4] Kumar V, Ludlow J, Soares Cevidanes LH, Mol A. In Vivo Comparison of Conventional and Cone Beam CT Synthesized Cephalograms. Angle Orthod 2008;78:873-9. doi: 10.2319/082907-399.1
[5] Zamora N, Llamas JM, Cibrian R, Gandia JL, Paredes V. Cephalometric Measurements from 3D Reconstructed Images Compared with Conventional 2D Images. Angle Orthod 2011;81:856-64. doi: 10.2319/121210-717.1
[6] Jadhav M, Bhosale V, Patil A, Shinde S. Comparison of Volumetric Dimensions of Pharyngeal Airway for Different Dentofacial Skeletal Patterns Using Cone Beam Computed Tomography. Folia Med (Plovdiv) 2020;62:572-7. doi: 10.3897/folmed.62.e48930
[7] Alhammadi MS, Almashraqi AA, Halboub E, Almahdi S, Jali T, Atafi A, et al. Pharyngeal Airway Spaces in Different Skeletal Malocclusions: A CBCT 3D Assessment. Cranio 2021;39:97-106. doi: 10.1080/08869634.2019.1583301
[8] Alves PV, Zhao L, O’Gara M, Patel PK, Bolognese AM. Three-dimensional Cephalometric Study of Upper Airway Space in Skeletal Class II and III Healthy Patients. J Craniofac Surg 2008;19:1497-507. doi: 10.1097/SCS.0b013e31818972ef
[9] Tseng YC, Tsai FC, Chou ST, Hsu CY, Cheng JH, Chen CM. Evaluation of Pharyngeal Airway Volume for Different Dentofacial Skeletal Patterns Using Cone-beam Computed Tomography. J Dent Sci 2021;16:51-7. doi: 10.1016/j.jds.2020.07.015
[10] Shokri A, Miresmaeili A, Ahmadi A, Amini P, Falah-Kooshki S. Comparison of Pharyngeal Airway Volume in Different Skeletal Facial Patterns Using Cone Beam Computed Tomography. J Clin Exp Dent 2018;10:e1017-28. doi: 10.4317/jced.55033
[11] Zheng ZH, Yamaguchi T, Kurihara A, Li HF, Maki K. Three-dimensional Evaluation of Upper Airway in Patients with Different Anteroposterior Skeletal Patterns. Orthod Craniofac Res 2014;17:38-48. doi: 10.1111/ocr.12029
[12] Schwab RJ, Goldberg AN. Upper Airway Assessment: Radiographic and Other Imaging Techniques. Otolaryngol Clin North Am 1998;31:931-68. doi: 10.1016/s0030-6665(05)70100-6
[13] Jakobsone G, Stenvik A, Espeland L. The Effect of Maxillary Advancement and Impaction on the Upper Airway after Bimaxillary Surgery to Correct Class III Malocclusion. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2011;139:e369-76. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2010.07.022
[14] Muto T, Takeda S, Kanazawa M, Yamazaki A, Fujiwara Y, Mizoguchi I. The Effect of Head Posture on the Pharyngeal Airway Space (PAS). Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2002;31:579-83. doi: 10.1054/ijom.2002.0279
[15] Miyamoto K, Ozbek MM, Lowe AA, Fleetham JA. Effect of Body Position on Tongue Posture in Awake Patients with Obstructive Sleep Apnoea. Thorax 1997;52:255-9. doi: 10.1136/thx.52.3.255
[16] Elagib T, Kyung HM, Hung BQ, Hong M. Assessment of Pharyngeal Airway in Korean Adolescents According to Skeletal Pattern, Sex, and Cervical Vertebral Maturation: A Cross-sectional CBCT Study. Korean J Orthod 2022;52:345-53. doi: 10.4041/kjod21.267
[17] Opdebeeck H, Bell WH, Eisenfeld J, Mishelevich D. Comparative Study between the SFS and LFS Rotation as a Possible Morphogenic Mechanism. Am J Orthod 1978;74:509-21. doi: 10.1016/0002-9416(78)90026-x
[18] Di Carlo G, Polimeni A, Melsen B, Cattaneo PM. The Relationship between Upper Airways and Craniofacial Morphology Studied in 3D. A CBCT Study. Orthod Craniofac Res 2015;18:1-11. doi: 10.1111/ocr.12053