Skip to search boxSkip to navigationSkip to main content

Upper airways evaluation in young adults with an anterior open bite: A CBCT retrospective controlled and cross-sectional study

  • Patricia Aurora Vidal-Manyari(corresponding author)
    ,
  • ,
  • Ludy Marileidy Jimenez-Valdivia
    ,
  • Heraldo Luis Dias-Da Silveira
    ,
  • Mariana Boessio-Vizzotto
*Corresponding author for this work
  • Universidad Científica del Sur
    ,
  • ,
  • Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul
Research Output:
Contribution to journal
Article
Peer-review

Publication Information

Output type

Research Output:
Contribution to journal
Article
Peer-review

Original language

English

Pages from-to (Number of pages)

Pages 276-285 (10 pages)

Journal (Volume, Issue Number)

International Orthodontics (Volume 18, Issue 2)

Publication milestones

  • Published - 06/2020

Publication status

Published - 06/2020

ISSN

1761-7227

Publication IDs

  • Scopus: 85081982328
  • PubMed: 32199748

Abstract

Objective: To compare the dimensions of the upper airway in young adults with anterior open bite versus matched individuals with an adequate overbite (control group) using different measurement approaches (linear, area, and volume measures). Materials and methods: The sample included 137 cone-beam computed tomographies (CBCTs) of young adults (74 men and 63 women) divided into two groups: 47 CBCTs of individuals (mean age 27.89) with open bite (overbite depth indicator (ODI) 56.84° ± 9.48° and Frankfort mandibular plane angle (FMA) 31.21° ± 6.44°) and 90 CBCTs of individuals (mean age 26.87) without an open bite (ODI 62.24° ± 9.47°, FMA 26.79° ± 5.81°). Two trained and calibrated orthodontists made all linear, area, and volume measurements on the CBCT records of the upper airways using Planmeca Romexis software. The Mann-Whitney U-test, chi-squared test, and multiple linear regression were applied. Significance was set at P < 0.05. Results: There were no differences in linear or volume measurements between groups, but there was a greater area in the open bite group (greater mean difference between groups 928.3 mm2) than the control group. No variable influenced nasopharyngeal airway volume, but ANB angle affected oropharyngeal airway volume (β = −623.87) and total airway volume (β = −651.48). Conclusions: Orthodontists should be aware that the airways diagnosis can vary depending on the measurement approach used, the volumetric method being the gold standard. The pharyngeal airway volume was similar in individuals with vs. without an open bite and is mainly influenced by ANB angle in both groups.

Funding Details

this study was approved by the Ethics in Research Committee of the School of Dentistry of the Cientifica del Sur University (approval number: 2018-00014).
FundersFunding numbers
School of Dentistry of the Cientifica del Sur University
2018-00014