Assessment of airway dimensions in skeletal Class I malocclusion patients with various vertical facial patterns: A cephalometric study in a sample of the Saudi population

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare airway widths among skeletal Class I malocclusion patients with different vertical facial patterns. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of 103 lateral cephalograms of skeletal Class I patients (mean age of 20 ± 2.3 years) with no history of orthodontic treatment, trauma, facial syndromes, or nasopharyngeal dysfunction were included. Based on the Frankfort–mandibular plane angle measurements, the sample was divided into three groups: low-angle, high-angle, and normal-angle groups. Upper and lower pharyngeal airway widths were measured as described by McNamara. The analysis of variance test was performed to compare the means of groups. Pairwise comparisons were performed using Tukey's post-hoc test. Differences were considered statistically significant at P < 0.05. RESULTS: ANOVA showed a significant mean difference between the groups for both the upper and lower airway widths with P values of 0.011 and 0.003, respectively. Tukey Pairwise comparisons showed the upper airway width to be significantly narrower in the high-angle group compared to the normal-angle ( P = 0.021) and low-angle groups ( P = 0.013). Furthermore, the lower airway width in the high angle group was significantly narrower than the normal angle ( P = 0.020) and low-angle groups ( P = 0.017). There were no statistically significant differences between normal and low angle groups. CONCLUSIONS: The upper and lower pharyngeal widths in the Class I high-angle group were significantly narrower than those in the normal-angle and low-angle groups.

Comparison of Pharyngeal Airway Width among Individuals having Skeletal Class I Malocclusion with Different Growth Patterns

“…18 In the present study, the mean upper airway space dimensions were not significantly different (p=0.201) in individuals with class I malocclusion having different vertical facial height (low angle, normal or high angle). However, Alfawazan, 19 in his study concluded that the individuals with a high angle vertical facial pattern had statistically significant narrow upper airway widths compared to those with low or normal angle (p=0.013, p=0.021, respectively). Also, Shastri et al revealed that pharyngeal length was larger in low angle subjects than in high angle subjects.…”

Analysis of upper airway measurements and cephalometric measurements using two-dimensional Cephalometry and threedimensional Computed Tomography in patients with skeletal Class III malocclusion.

“…In conclusion, 3D analysis of soft tissue morphology can provide valuable insights into the relationship between soft tissue characteristics and airway dimensions [9]. In relation to the dimensions of the upper airways, the study by Alfawzan indicates that the angular orientation of the mandible can also influence these dimensions [10]. Statistically significant differences were found in airway dimensions among patients with different values of the Frankfort Mandibular Plane Angle (FMA).…”

Cephalometric analysis by Ricketts, McNamara, Steiner and Jarabak

“…McNamara proposed an airway analysis to evaluate the widths of the upper and lower pharyngeal airways [17] , facilitating the study of these in a superficial manner [18] , a tendency to smaller airway dimensions has been observed in younger patients with female gender of skeletal class II [19] . The McNamara measurement is obtained by analyzing the position and morphology of the structures of the facial skeleton looking for a relationship between the upper and lower jaw with respect to the base of the skull, evaluating the intermaxillary relationship with the vertical dimension, its main purpose is to obtain differences between the skeletal and dento-alveolar components using the triangle called with the same name [5,18] .…”