Estimating Craniofacial Growth Cessation: Comparison of Asymptote- and Rate-Based Methods

Abstract

Objective: To identify differences between asymptote- and rate-based methods for estimating age and size at growth cessation in linear craniofacial measurements. Design: This is a retrospective, longitudinal study. Five linear measurements were collected from lateral cephalograms as part of the Craniofacial Growth Consortium Study (CGCS). Four estimates of growth cessation, including 2 asymptote- (GCasym, GCerr) and 2 rate-based (GCabs, GC10%) methods, from double logistic models of craniofacial growth were compared. Participants: Cephalometric data from participants in 6 historic longitudinal growth studies were included in the CGCS. At least 1749 individuals (870 females, 879 males), unaffected by craniofacial anomalies, were included in all analyses. Individuals were represented by a median of 11 images between 2.5 and 31.3 years of age. Results: GCasym consistently occurred before GCerr and GCabs consistently occurred before GC10% within the rate-based approaches. The ordering of the asymptote-based methods compared to the rate-based methods was not consistent across measurements or between males and females. Across the 5 measurements, age at growth cessation ranged from 13.56 (females, nasion-basion, GCasym) to 24.39 (males, sella-gonion, GCerr). Conclusions: Adolescent growth cessation is an important milestone for treatment planning. Based on our findings, we recommend careful consideration of specific definitions of growth cessation in both clinical and research settings since the most appropriate estimation method may differ according to patients’ needs. The different methods presented here provide useful estimates of growth cessation that can be applied to raw data and to a variety of statistical models of craniofacial growth.

Craniofacial growth and morphology among intersecting clinical categories

“…Age at peak growth velocity (aPGV), the mean, fifth percentile, and 95th percentile trait value at peak growth velocity (mean: sPGV), rate of growth at peak growth velocity (PGV), and the percentage of growth complete at peak growth velocity (gPGV) are estimated from posterior distributions. Growth cessation is defined as the age at which the model reaches 98% of the adult size asymptote (Hardin et al, 2021), equal to the sum of f , f TC , and a TC . Age at growth cessation (aGC), the mean, fifth percentile, and 95th percentile trait values at growth cessation (mean: sGC), growth rate at growth cessation (rGC), and the percentage of growth complete at growth cessation (gGC) were estimated from posterior distributions.…”

“…These conflicting results could stem from a number of differences in study design and, in particular, how growth cessation is estimated. Hardin et al (2021) provide an assessment of how different methods and definitions of growth cessation can influence estimates of this milestone.…”

Assessment of the Relationship between the Total Occlusal Area of the Human Permanent Upper First and Second Molars and the Robusticity of the Facial Skeleton in Sex-Different Cranial Samples of Homo Sapiens: A Preliminary Study

“…The function of the upper molars (M 1 and M 2 ) related to masticatory activity is associated with the transfer of strains through these teeth to specific areas of the facial skeleton, which may affect the formation of their massiveness until the end of the facial skeleton growth process (potentially to 25 years—e.g., for posterior facial height—see [ 104 ]). This means that in a given individual, e.g., a male aged around 25 years, the average working time of M 1 is already about 19 years and in the case of M 2 13 years (the average age of M 1 eruption is 6 years and for M 2 —12 years—[ 68 ]; more precisely for African females: M 1 —5.4 years, M 2 —9.8 years and African males: M 1 —5.1 years; M 2 —10.5 years; Australian females: M 1 —6.5 years, M 2 —12.3 years and Australian males M 1 —6.7 years, M 2 —12.7 years [ 105 , 106 ]).…”

Sagittal and Vertical Changes of the Maxilla after Surgically Assisted Rapid Palatal Expansion: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

“…Most of the included studies had an average subject age above 20, with few including teenage patients. Although craniofacial growth can last up to 24 years old in some individuals [37], since the time intervals between pre-and post-SARPE radiographs of the included studies are within six months, with most of them even a few weeks apart, the influence of growth in the current evaluation, if any, is probably negligible.…”