Three-dimensional evaluation of pharyngeal airway and maxillary arch in mouth and nasal breathing children with skeletal Class I and II

Abstract

Objective This study aimed to investigate whether the subjects with mouth breathing (MB) or nasal breathing (NB) with different sagittal skeletal patterns showed different maxillary arch and pharyngeal airway characteristics. Methods Cone-beam computed tomography scans from 70 children aged 10 to 12 years with sagittal skeletal Classes I and II were used to measure the pharyngeal airway, maxillary width, palatal area, and height. The independent t-test and the Mann–Whitney U test were used for the intragroup analysis of pharyngeal airway and maxillary arch parameters. Results In the Skeletal Class I group, nasopharyngeal airway volume (P < 0.01), oropharyngeal airway volume (OPV), and total pharyngeal airway volume (TPV) (all P < 0.001) were significantly greater in subjects with NB than in those with MB. Furthermore, intermolar width, maxillary width at the molars, intercanine width, maxillary width at the canines, and palatal area were significantly larger in subjects with NB than in those with MB (all P < 0.001). In the Skeletal Class II group, OPV, TPV (both P < 0.05) were significantly greater in subjects with NB than in those with MB. No significant differences in pharyngeal airway parameters in the MB group between subjects with Skeletal Class I and those with Skeletal Class II. Conclusion Regardless of sagittal Skeletal Class I or II, the pharyngeal airway and maxillary arch in children with MB differ from those with NB. However, the pharyngeal airway was not significantly different between Skeletal Class I and II in children with MB.

Impact of class II and class III skeletal malocclusion on pharyngeal airway dimensions: A systematic literature review and meta-analysis

“…Other dimensions like minimum constricted area and upper airway dimensions among other dimensions were also reported. Great interest and attention from orthodontists have been reported by research [ 26 ].…”

“…Additionally, the location of the upper and lower jaws is associated with constriction of the anteroposterior aspect of the airway [ 13 ]. Upper airway obstruction and thus dysfunction leads to oral breathing which impacts craniofacial and skeletal morphology causing malocclusion [ 26 ]. Researchers have directed effort and attention towards cognizing the relationship between pharyngeal airway and dental anomalies.…”

“…Researchers have directed effort and attention towards cognizing the relationship between pharyngeal airway and dental anomalies. Different skeletal patterns have been explored [ 26 ].…”

Facial soft tissue changes and volumetric analysis of upper airways in patients undergoing surgically assisted rapid maxillary expansion using a transpalatal distractor

“…With the evolution of CT-scans, readily available and widely used in dentistry, we have an ideal tool to assess the upper airway, soft tissues and tissue relationships. 22 , 23 …”

The effects of adenoid hypertrophy and oral breathing on maxillofacial development: a review of the literature

“…Habumugisha et al [42] studied cone-beam CT images from 70 children aged 10 to 12 years in the sagittal position. These scans showed that the intermolar width, maxillary width of the molars, intercuspal width, maxillary width of cuspids and palatal area, were significantly greater in nasal-breathing patients than in mouth-breathing patients, thus indicating that the maxillary arch morphology of mouth-breathing children was narrower and longer than that of children in a nasalbreathing group.…”