İSKELETSEL SINIF II BİREYLERDE NAZOFARENGEAL HAVAYOLUNUN FARKLI GELİŞİM DÖNEMLERİNDE DEĞERLENDİRİLMESİ

Yıl 2017, Cilt: 27 Sayı: 1, 1 - 6, 16.04.2017

Özge Uslu Akçam

https://doi.org/10.17567/ataunidfd.307084

Cited By: 1

Öz

Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı iskeletsel Sınıf II
malokluzyona sahip bireylerde (ANB>5)
nazofarengeal ve orofarengeal havayolu boyutunun pre-pubertal, pubertal ve
post-pubertal gelişim dönemlerinde karşılaştırılarak değerlendirilmesidir.

Gereç ve Yöntem: Anabilimdalı
arşivinden iskeletsel Sınıf II malokluzyona sahip 45 vakanın (21 erkek, 24
kız)(18 pre-pubertal, 12 pubertal, 15 post-pubertal) tedavi başı lateral
sefalometrik filmleri seçilmiştir. Çalışmada 13 sefalometrik nokta, 4 açısal
ölçüm, 4 doğrusal ölçüm ve 4 oransal ölçüm Pordios bilgisayar programı
kullanılarak analiz edilmiştir. Parametrelere ait ortalama ve standart sapmalar
hesaplanmıştır. Üç grup arasındaki farkın hesaplanması için istatistik analiz
(ANOVA ve Duncan’s testi) uygulanmıştır.

Bulgular:Pre-pubertal grup en küçük
nazofarengeal hava yolu ölçümüne (NAS) (21,3mm ±5,1) sahip bulunmuştur, ve NAS
ölçümü erişkin gruba doğru artış göstermiştir (23,2mm±4,8 to  26,6mm±4,4).
Diğer yandan, orofarengeal hava yolu ölçümü (OAS), gruplar arasında anlamlı bir
fark göstermemektedir (10,1mm±2,7- 8,1mm±2,3 8,8mm±2,2)

Sonuç:

Bu çalışma, iskeletsel Sınıf
II bireylerde üst havayolu alanının gelişim ile arttığını, orofarengeal
boşluğun sabit kaldığını göstermektedir

Anahtar kelimeler:Maloklüzyon, Angle Sınıf 2, Nazofarinks, Orofarinks, Ortodonti

EVALUATION OF NASOPHARYNGEAL AIRWAY SPACE OF SKELETAL CLASS II SUBJECTS IN
DIFFERENT GROWTH STAGES

 Aim:The aim of this study was to compare the dimensions of the nasopharynx and oropharnynx of individuals with skeletal Class II anomaly (ANB>5 degrees) during the pre-pubertal, pubertal and post-pubertal (adult)growth periods.

Material and Method: A total of 45 pre-treatment lateral cephalograms of skeletal Class II cases
(21 boys, 24 girls)(18 in pre-pubertal, 12 in pubertal, 15
in post-pubertal growth periods) were selected from the department archives. 13 cephalometric
landmarks, 4 angular measurements, 4 linear measurements and 4 rational
measurements were analyzed using Pordios computer program. Means and standard deviations of the parameters have been
calculated and statistical analysis (Analysis of Variance and Duncan’s
tests) was utilized to compare the differences
between the three groups.

Results:Pre-peak group showed the smallest nasopharyngeal airway space (NAS) (21,3mm ±5,1), and NAS showed an increase towards the adult group (23,2mm±4,8 to  26,6mm±4,4). On the other hand, oropharyngeal airway space (OAS), which was measured at the level of the tip of the soft palate,  did not show a significant difference between the groups (10,1mm±2,7- 8,1mm±2,3 8,8mm±2,2).

Conclusion: This study demonstrated that the
oropharyngeal gap remained constant in skeletal Class II individuals, while
superior airway space increased with growt

Key Words: Malocclusion, Angle Class 2; Nasopharynx; Oropharynx; OrthodoKey Words: ntics.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Maloklüzyon, Angle Sınıf 2, Nazofarinks, Orofarinks

Kaynakça

• 1. Iça B, Oztürk F. The effects of orthodontic malocclusions and treatments on airway dimensions, tongue and hyoid bone position. Cumhuriyet Dent J 2014;17:101 8.
• 2. Han S, Choi Y J, Chung C J, Kim J Y, Kim K H. Long-term pharyngeal airway changes after bionator treatment in adolescents with skeletal Class II malocclusions. Korean J Orthod 2014;44:13-9.
• 3. Proffit WR, Fields HW, Sarver DM. Contemporary orthodontics. 5 ed. St. Louis; Elsevier: 2012. p. 141-5. 4. Coben SE. The biology of Class II treatment. Am J Orthod 1971;59:470-87.
• 5. Souki BQ, Pimenta GB, Souki MQ, Franco LP, Becker HMG, Pinto JA. Prevalence of malocclusion among mouth breathing children: Do expectations meet reality? Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 2000;73:767-73.
• 6. Martin SE, Mathur R, Marshall I, Douglas NJ. The effect of age, sex, obesity and posture on upper airway size. Eur Respir J 1997;10:2087-90.
• 7. Solow B, Siersbaek-Nielsen S, Greve E. Airway adequacy, head posture and craniofacial morphology. Am J Orthod 1984;86:214-23.
• 8. Muto T, Yamazaki A, Takeda S. A cephalometric evaluation of the pharyngeal airway space in patients with mandibular retrognathia and prognathia, and normal subjects. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2008;37:228 31.
• 9. Battagel JM, Johal A, L’Estrange PR, Croft CB, Kotecha B. Changes in airway and hyoid position in response to mandibular protrusion in subjects with obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA). Eur J Orthod 1999;21:363-76.
• 10. Hong J, Oh K, Kim B, Kim Y, Park Y. Three dimensional analysis of pharyngeal airway volume in adults with anterior position of the mandible. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2011;140:161-9.
• 11. El H, Palomo JM. Airway volume for different dentofacial skeletal patterns. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2011;139:511-21.
• 12. Martin O, Muelas L, Vinas MJ. Comparative study of nasopharyngeal soft-tissue characteristics in patients with Class III malocclusion. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2011;139:242-51.
• 13. Taylor M, Hans MG, Strohl KP, Nelson S. Broadbent BH. Soft tissue growth of the oropharynx. Angle Orthod 1996;66:393-400.
• 14. Jakhi S A, Karjodkar F R. Use of cephalometry in diagnosing resonance disorders. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1990;98:323-32.
• 15. Wu J T, Huang G F, Huang C S, Noordhoff M S. Nasopharyngoscopic evaluation and cephalometric analysis of velopharynx in normal and cleft palate patients. Ann Plast Surg 1996;36:117-22.
• 16. Linder-Aronson S. Adenoids: their effect on mode of breathing and nasal airflow and their relationship to characteristics of the facial skeleton and the dentition. A biometric, rhino-manometric and cephalometro-radiographic study on children with and without adenoids. Acta Otolaryng 1970;265:1-132.
• 17. Aboudara C, Nielsen I, Huang J C, Maki K, Miller A J, Hatcher D. Comparison of airway space with conventional lateral headfilms and 3-dimensional reconstruction from cone-beam computed tomography. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2009;135:468-79.
• 18. Preston CB, Lampasso JD, Tobias PV. Cephalometric evaluation and measurement of upper airway. Semin Orthod 2004;10:3-15.
• 19. Tsai HH, Ho CY, Lee PL, Tan CT. Cephalometric analysis of nonobese snorers either with or without obstructive sleep apnea syndrome. Angle Orthod 2007;77:1054-61.
• 20. Jakobsone G, Stenvik A, Espeland L. The effect of maxillary advancement and impaction on the upper airway after bimaxillary surgery to correct Class III malocclusion. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2011;139:369 76.
• 21. Palaisa J, Ngan P, Martin C and Razmus T. Use of conventional tomography to evaluate changes in the nasal cavity with rapid palatal expansion. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 2007;132:458-66.
• 22. Doruk C, Sökücü O, Sezer H, Canbay EI. Evaluation of nasal airway resistance during rapid maxillary expansion using acoustic rhinometry. Eur J Orthod 2004;26:397-401.
• 23. Adachi T, Kogo M, Iida S, Hamaguchi M, Matsuya T. Measurement of velopharyngeal movements induced by isolated stimulation of levator veli palatini and pharyngeal constrictor muscles. J Dent Res. 1997;76:1745-50.
• 24. Akgüner M. Velopharyngeal anthropometric analysis with MRI in normal subjects. Ann Plast Surg 1999;43:142-7.
• 25. Akcam MO, Toygar TU, Wada T. Longitudinal investigation of soft palate and nasopharyngeal airway relations in different rotation types. Angle Orthod 2002;72:521-6.
• 26. Johnston CD, Richardson A. Cephalometric changes in adult pharyngeal morphology. Eur J Orthod 1999;21:357-62. 27. Joseph AA, Elbaum J, Cisneros GJ, Eisig SB. A cephalometric comparative study of the soft tissue airway dimensions in persons with hyperdivergent and normodivergent facial patterns. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1998;56:135-9.
• 28. Zhong Z, Tang Z, Gao X, Zeng X L. A comparison study of upper airway among different skeletal craniofacial patterns in nonsnoring Chinese children. Angle Orthod 2010;80:267-74.
• 29. Sosa F A, Graber T M, Muller T P. Postpharyngeal lymphadenoid tissue in Angle Class I and Class II malocclusions. Am J Orthod 1982;81:299-309.
• 30. Kerr W J. The nasopharynx, face height and overbite. Angle Orthod 1985;55:31-6.
• 31. Wenzel A, Williams S, Ritzau M. Relationships of changes in craniofacial morphology, head posture, and nasopharyngeal airway size following mandibular osteotomy. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1989;96:138-43.
• 32. Memon S, Fida M, Shaikh A. Comparison of different craniofacial patterns with pharyngeal widths. J Coll Physicians Surg Pak 2012;22:302-6.
• 33. Ekizer A, Türker G. Farklı iskeletsel malokluzyonların üst havayolu boyutları üzerine etkileri. Cumhuriyet Den J 2015;18(1):9-16.
• 34. Subtelny JD. A cephalometric study of the growth of the soft palate. Plast Reconstr Surg 1957;19:49-62.
• 35. Wada T, Satoh K, Tachimura T, Tatsuta U. Comparison of nasopharyngeal growth between patients with clefts and non-cleft controls. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 1997;34:405-9.
• 36. Satoh K, Wada T, Tachimura T, Sakuda S, Shiba R. A cephalometric study by multivariate analysis of growth of the bony nasopharynx in patients with clefts and non-cleft controls. J Cranio Maxillofac Surg 1998;26:394-9.
• 37. Aydemir Ş, Oktay H. Obstructive Sleep Apnea Sendromu. Atatürk Univ Diş Hek Fak Derg 2001;11(1):83-9.
• 38. Adışen MZ, Mısırlıoğlu M. Obstruktif uyku apnesi sendromu açısından yüksek riskli bireyler ile düşük riskli bireyler arası sino-nazal bölgede anatomik varyasyon ve patoloji görülme sıklığının karşılaştırılması. Atatürk Üniv Diş Hek Fak Der. 2015;25(2):153-9.
• 39. Gao X, Zeng X, Fu M, Huang X. Nasopharygeal size in obstructive sleep apnea syndrome. Chin J Otorhinolaryngol 1999;34:37-40