Correlation of tongue posture with dental arch characteristics in different skeletal patterns using cone-beam computed tomography
Journal of Dental School,
Vol. 42 No. 3 (2024),
27 July 2024
,
Page 111-119
https://doi.org/10.22037/jds.v42i3.45256
Abstract
Objectives: This study assessed the correlation of tongue posture with dental arch characteristics in sagittal and vertical skeletal patterns using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT).
Materials and Methods: This cross-sectional study evaluated 225 CBCT scans of sagittal Class I, II, and III patients. Class I and II groups were subdivided into high-angle, normal, and low-angle vertical subgroups. Palatal length, width, and height, maxillary width (Wmax), mandibular width (Wman), tongue posture according to the Graber’s analysis, tongue length (TGL), and tongue height (TGH) were three-dimensionally measured. Statistical analyses were conducted using one-way and two-way ANOVA, and Pearson and Spearman tests (alpha=0.05).
Results: All dental arch parameters were significantly greater in Class III, compared with Class I and II groups (P<0.05), except for) Wman, palatal length, and palatal height( . Palatal height was significantly greater in Class II and III, than Class I group (P<0.05). Wmax was lower in high-angle than low-angle, and palatal length was lower in high-angle than low-angle and normal groups (P<0.05). In Class I normal-angle patients, Wmax had a positive correlation with TGL. In Class I low-angle patients, Wmax had a moderate positive correlation with TGH.
Conclusion: Significant differences were found in Wmax and palatal length among the vertical groups. In different skeletal patterns Wmax, Wman had a low to moderate positive correlations with D4, D5, D5ʹ, TGL and TGH. Wmax in Class I was significantly lower than that in Class III; this variable in Class II was significantly lower than that in Class III
Palatal width in Class I and Class II was significantly lower than that in Class III.
Palatal height in Class I was significantly lower than that in Class II and Class III
- Malocclusion
- Tongue
- Cone-beam computed tomography
How to Cite
References
Fishman LS. Postural and Dimensional Changes in the Tongue from Rest Position to Occlusion. Angle Orthod. 1969;39(2):109-13.
Seden AK, KEÇİK D. Lower Incisor Inclination in Relation to Head Posture, Tongue and Hyoid Positions. Cumhuriyet Dent J 2019;22(3):310-7.
Fatima F, Fida M. The assessment of resting tongue posture in different sagittal skeletal patterns. Dental Press J Orthod. 2019;24(3):55-63.
Iwasaki T, Sato H, Suga H, Takemoto Y, Inada E, Saitoh I, et al. Relationships among nasal resistance, adenoids, tonsils, and tongue posture and maxillofacial form in Class II and Class III children. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2017;151(5):929-40.
Primozic J, Farčnik F, Perinetti G, Richmond S, Ovsenik M. The association of tongue posture with the dentoalveolar maxillary and mandibular morphology in Class III malocclusion: a controlled study. Eur J Orthod. 2013;35(3):388-93.
Subrahmanya RM, Gupta S. Assessment and Comparison of Tongue Posture in Individuals with Different Vertical Facial Patterns. J Orofacial Res. 1970;4(2):67-71.
Ucar FI, Uysal T. Orofacial airway dimensions in subjects with Class I malocclusion and different growth patterns. Angle Orthod. 2011;81(3):460-8.
Jacobson A, White L. Radiographic cephalometry: from basics to 3-D imaging. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2007;131(4):S133.
Cheema AA, Ijaz A, MCPS M. Proportion of maxillary vertical excess in dental patients Visiting the children's hospital, Lahore. Pakistan Oral Dent J. 2006;26(1):43-50.
Nanda RS, Merrill RM. Cephalometric assessment of sagittal relationship between maxilla and mandible. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1994;105(4):328-44.
Kim SH, Choi SK. Changes in the hyoid bone, tongue, and oropharyngeal airway space after mandibular setback surgery evaluated by cone-beam computed tomography. Maxillofac Plast Reconstr Surg. 2020;42(1):27.
Graber TM. Functional analysis. In: Graber TM, Rakosi T, Petrovic AG, editors. Dentofacial orthopedics with functional appliances. 2nd ed. Maryland Heights, Missouri: Mosby; 1997. pp. 127–8.
Braun S, Hnat WP, Fender DE, Legan HL. The form of the human dental arch. Angle Orthod. 1998;68(1):29-36.
Ning R, Guo J, Li Q, Martin D. Maxillary width and hard palate thickness in men and women with different vertical and sagittal skeletal patterns. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2021;159(5):564-73.
Huang X, Hu X, Zhao Y, Wang Y, Gu Y. Preliminary comparison of threedimensional reconstructed palatal morphology in subjects with different sagittal and vertical patterns. BMC Oral Health. 2020;20(1):55.
Alarashi M, Franchi L, Marinelli A, Defraia E. Morphometric analysis of the transverse dentoskeletal features of Class II malocclusion in the mixed dentition. Angle Orthod. 2003;73(1):21-5.
- Abstract Viewed: 153 times
- PDF Downloaded: 105 times