1998
DOI: 10.1016/s0165-5876(98)00049-4
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Relationship between chronic nasal obstruction and craniofacial growth: an experimental model

Abstract: The aim of this paper was to verify if the growth of the nasomaxillary complex can be influenced by a purely functional alteration such as nasal obstruction, which was induced experimentally in a genetically controlled animal model. Sixty albino rats were employed. Twenty of them had the right nostril occluded by a synthetic resin; another twenty had both nostrils occluded; the other 20 were taken as control group. When the growth was completed, the rats were sacrificed and cephalometric analysis was carried o… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
25
0
1

Year Published

2006
2006
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
4
3

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 37 publications
(29 citation statements)
references
References 19 publications
2
25
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Similarities exist in the edge values of lower facial projection; all three species are integrated in the lower-facial-projection-tonasal-breadth edge. This could be due to the dependency of nasal breadth on lower facial projection (Glanville, 1969;Holton et al, 2004), or alternatively, the influence that normal nasal breathing has on the overall growth of the mammalian face (Harvold et al, 1981;Yamada et al, 1997;Scarano et al, 1998). In addition, lower facial projection always has a robust edge with basion-nasion, a region of facial hafting to the neurocranium.…”
Section: Discussion Patterns Of Integration Between Humans Chimpanzementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Similarities exist in the edge values of lower facial projection; all three species are integrated in the lower-facial-projection-tonasal-breadth edge. This could be due to the dependency of nasal breadth on lower facial projection (Glanville, 1969;Holton et al, 2004), or alternatively, the influence that normal nasal breathing has on the overall growth of the mammalian face (Harvold et al, 1981;Yamada et al, 1997;Scarano et al, 1998). In addition, lower facial projection always has a robust edge with basion-nasion, a region of facial hafting to the neurocranium.…”
Section: Discussion Patterns Of Integration Between Humans Chimpanzementioning
confidence: 99%
“…All rats were lightly anesthetized with 60 mg/kg of thiamylal sodium (Isozol®, Nichi-Iko Pharmaceutical Co., Toyama, Japan) administered intraperitoneally (i.p.). Rats in the experimental group received a left-sided nasal obstruction via the cauterization of the left external nostril (Scarano et al, 1998; Padzys et al, 2011). The tissue surrounding the left external nostril was burned by placing a surgical cauterizing instrument (Hakko Red, Hakko Corporation, Osaka, Japan) on the nostril, consequently occluding the orifice of the nostril without mechanical or chemical damage to the olfactory mucosa.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A normal respiratory pattern is associated with normal craniofacial structures and adequate interaction between mastication and swallowing (Yamada et al, 1997). Experimental studies have elucidated that nasal obstruction induces a significant reduction in the vertical development of the nasomaxillary complex and skull base along the longitudinal axis (Scarano et al, 1998). It also results in a significant reduction in the growth of the masseter and the anterior digastric (Dig) muscle (Gelhaye et al, 2006; Izu et al, 2010).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Thus, continuous airflow through the nasal passage during breathing induces a constant stimulus for the lateral growth of maxilla and for lowering of the palatal vault. In the other hand, nasal obstruction leading to mouth breathing results in not only the changes in tongue and lip positions but also open mouth posture, downward and backward rotation of mandible, constricted and V-shaped maxillary dental arch, and an increased frequency of posterior crossbite [4,[6][7][8][9][10][11][12]. Maxillary deficiency and accompanying posterior crossbite is a common malocclusion encountered clinically.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%