Cephalometric association of mandibular size/length to the surface area and dimensions of the frontal and maxillary sinuses

ABSTRACT

Objective: This study aimed to determine the cephalometric association of mandibular size/length to the surface area and dimensions of the frontal and maxillary sinuses. Materials and Methods: This descriptive study was conducted on 116 digital lateral cephalograms of 38 patients with skeletal Class I malocclusion (normal), 40 patients with skeletal Class II malocclusion with mandibular deficiency, and 38 patients with skeletal Class III malocclusion with mandibular excess. Both male and female patients were included. Using AutoCAD 2016 software, the anteroposterior dimension, height and surface area of the frontal and maxillary sinuses, mandibular body length and cephalometric indices including anterior and posterior cranial bases, and growth pattern indices were measured on lateral cephalograms. Results: Dimensions and surface area of the frontal and maxillary sinuses in skeletal Class III malocclusion were greater than those in other groups. These variables were significantly correlated with the mandibular body length. The coefficient for the correlation of height, width, and surface area of the frontal sinus with mandibular body length was 0.253, 0.284, and 0.490, respectively. The coefficient for the correlation of height, length, and surface area of the maxillary sinus with mandibular body length was 0.346, 0.657, and 0.661, respectively. These variables (except for the frontal sinus width) had a significant correlation with the anterior and posterior cranial bases. The frontal sinus width had a significant correlation with the anterior cranial base. These variables in males were greater than those in females. Conclusion: The dimensions and surface area of the frontal and maxillary sinuses in skeletal Class III malocclusion were greater than those in other groups. These variables (except for the frontal sinus width) had a significant correlation with the anterior and posterior cranial bases and mandibular body length.

Key words:

Frontal sinus - maxillary sinuses - skeletal malocclusion

• REFERENCES

• 1 Oktay H. The study of the maxillary sinus areas in different orthodontic malocclusions. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1992; 102: 143-5
• 2 Kiran CS, Ramaswamy P, Khaitan T. Frontal sinus index – A new tool for sex determination. J Forensic Radiol Imaging 2014; 2: 77-9
• 3 Akhlaghi M, Bakhtavar K, Moarefdoost J, Kamali A, Rafeifar S. Frontal sinus parameters in computed tomography and sex determination. Leg Med (Tokyo) 2016; 19: 22-7
• 4 Goyal M, Acharya AB, Sattur AP, Naikmasur VG. Are frontal sinuses useful indicators of sex?. J Forensic Leg Med 2013; 20: 91-4
• 5 Guevara YV, Watanabe N, Yamaki M, Saito I. The frontal sinus enlargement as an indicator of growth maturity in class III patients – A pilot study. Int J Med Sci Public Health 2013; 2: 451-5
• 6 Brown WA, Molleson TI, Chinn S. Enlargement of the frontal sinus. Ann Hum Biol 1984; 11: 221-6
• 7 Emirzeoglu M, Sahin B, Bilgic S, Celebi M, Uzun A. Volumetric evaluation of the paranasal sinuses in normal subjects using computer tomography images: A stereological study. Auris Nasus Larynx 2007; 34: 191-5
• 8 Scuderi AJ, Harnsberger HR, Boyer RS. Pneumatization of the paranasal sinuses: Normal features of importance to the accurate interpretation of CT scans and MR images. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1993; 160: 1101-4
• 9 Urabi AH, Al-Nakib LH. Digital lateral cephalometric assessment of maxillary sinus dimensions in different skeletal classes. J Univ Baghdad 2012; 24: 35-8
• 10 Salehi P, Heidari S, Khajeh F. Relationship between frontal sinus surface area and mandibular size on lateral cephalograms of adults. J Isfahan Dent Sch 2012; 8: 244-50
• 11 Rossouw PE, Lombard CJ, Harris AM. The frontal sinus and mandibular growth prediction. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1991; 100: 542-6
• 12 Lambrechts AH, Harris AM, Rossouw PE, Stander I. Dimensional differences in the craniofacial morphologies of groups with deep and shallow mandibular antegonial notching. Angle Orthod 1996; 66: 265-72
• 13 Jacobson A. Radiographic Cephalometry: From Basics to Video Imaging. Chicago, Carol Stream, IL: Quintessence Publishing; 1995: p. 97-112
• 14 Rakosi T, Jonas I, Graber TM. Orthodontic Diagnosis. Foreword by Moyers RE. Stuttgart, New York: G. Thieme Verlag, Thieme Medical Publishers Inc.; 1993: p. 186
• 15 Yassaei S, Sorush M. Changes in hyoid position following treatment of class II division1 malocclusions with a functional appliance. J Clin Pediatr Dent 2008; 33: 81-4
• 16 Endo T, Abe R, Kuroki H, Kojima K, Oka K, Shimooka S. et al. Cephalometric evaluation of maxillary sinus sizes in different malocclusion classes. Odontology 2010; 98: 65-72
• 17 Al-Azzawi AM. Maxillary sinus area in both gender and its relation to skeletal class III malocclusion. Med J Babylon 2013; 10: 508-16
• 18 Watson RW, Myer TH, Sutherland IE, Vosbury MK. A display processor design. FJCC 1969; 35: 209-17
• 19 Tehranchi A, Motamedian SR, Saedi S, Kabiri S, Shidfar S. Correlation between frontal sinus dimensions and cephalometric indices: A cross-sectional study. Eur J Dent 2017; 11: 64-70
• 20 Szilvássy J. Development of the frontal sinuses. Anthropol Anz 1981; 39: 138-49
• 21 Hopkin GB, Houston WJ, James GA. The cranial base as an aetiological factor in malocclusion. Angle Orthod 1968; 38: 250-5
• 22 Dibbets JM. Morphological associations between the angle classes. Eur J Orthod 1996; 18: 111-8
• 23 Jalal FA. Estimation of Gender and Age Using Spiral CT Scanning of Maxillary Sinuses and Foramen Magnum. A Master Thesis Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, University of Baghdad 2008; p. 33-40