| Literature DB >> 27188799 |
Liang Li1,2, Wei Wu1,3, Guijun Yan4, Li Liu2, Hong Liu1, Guojv Li5, Jing Li5, Dongxu Liu1.
Abstract
The flow dynamics of respiratory airflow is the basic factor that influences the ventilation function of the upper airway. This research aimed to investigate the pharyngeal flow field characteristics after Twin Block (TB) treatment in growing patients with Class II(1) and mandibular retrognathia by computation fluid dynamics (CFD) simulation. Cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans of patients who have completed TB treatment (n = 30) and about to accept TB treatment (n = 30) were reconstructed. After CFD simulation, correlations between the pharyngeal pressure drop and morphological parameters were further analyzed. During inspiration, we found that the pressure minimum occurred in the hypopharynx, while the maximum pressure drop and velocity was located in the oropharynx. After TB treatment, the oropharynx and hypopharynx showed significant differences in airflow features, and the most obvious change was observed in the oropharynx. A significant correlation was discovered between the change amount of oropharyngeal pressure drop and volume (r = 0.694, p = 0.001), mean cross-sectional area (r = 0.859, p = 0.000), and ratio of the minimum and mean cross-sectional area (r = 0.898, p = 0.000) of the oropharynx. Our research suggested that the pharyngeal airflow characteristics response positively to mandibular advancement with the enlargement in volume, cross-sectional area and more uniform oropharyngeal area distribution.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27188799 PMCID: PMC4870688 DOI: 10.1038/srep26012
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1(a) The upper airway was divided into nasal cavity, nasoparynx, oropharynx, and hypopharynx and (b) 3D model of each section was reconstructed respectively.
Figure 2Mesh generation of the upper airway 3D geometry in (a) overall, (b) magnified, and (c) cross-sectional view.
The pharyngeal hydrodynamic parameters of TB and control group.
| Variables | TB group | Control group | p value | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| T1 | T2 | T1 & T2 | T2 & Control | |||
| Na-Pmin (Pa) | mean | 16.36 | 14.72 | 12.66 | 0.191 | 0.226 |
| SD | 5.29 | 4.84 | 4.20 | |||
| Na-vmax (m/s) | mean | 6.25 | 6.83 | 6.96 | 0.496 | 0.615 |
| SD | 2.93 | 3.07 | 2.78 | |||
| Na-ΔP (Pa) | mean | 38.14 | 35.93 | 36.72 | 0.332 | 0.269 |
| SD | 9.56 | 8.26 | 9.19 | |||
| Or-Pmin (Pa) | mean | −30.97 | −12.66 | −20.73 | 0.005 | 0.019 |
| SD | 7.46 | 4.89 | 6.53 | |||
| Or-vmax (m/s) | mean | 11.24 | 7.14 | 8.69 | 0.012 | 0.037 |
| SD | 3.36 | 1.92 | 2.16 | |||
| Or-ΔP (Pa) | mean | 67.43 | 40.18 | 53.25 | 0.004 | 0.020 |
| SD | 15.12 | 8.26 | 10.73 | |||
| Hy-Pmin (Pa) | mean | −48.90 | −43.96 | −46.46 | 0.524 | 0.416 |
| SD | 10.02 | 9.76 | 9.93 | |||
| Hy-vmax (m/s) | mean | 8.07 | 6.46 | 7.54 | 0.039 | 0.042 |
| SD | 3.14 | 2.75 | 3.02 | |||
| Hy-ΔP (Pa) | mean | 45.36 | 37.45 | 41.79 | 0.025 | 0.036 |
| SD | 10.01 | 9.36 | 9.60 | |||
(Na, nasopharyngeal; Or, oropharyngeal; Hy, hypopharynxgeal).
Figure 3The pressure profile of the pharyngeal airflow in (a) pre- and (b) post-treatment of TB group and (c) control group, and magnified view of the narrow region in (d) pre- and (e) post-treatment of TB group and (f) control group.
Figure 4The velocity profile of the pharyngeal airflow in (a) pre- and (b) post-treatment of TB group and (c) control group, and magnified view of the minimum cross-section in (d) pre- and (e) post-treatment of TB group and (f) control group.
Correlations between oropharyngeal pressure drop and morphological parameters.
| Variables | Or-V (T1-T2) | Or-Smean (T1-T2) | Or-LR/AP (T1-T2) | Or-Smin/Smean (T1-T2) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Or-ΔP (T1-T2) | 0.694 | 0.859 | 0.117 | 0.898 | |
| 0.001 | 0.000 | 0.537 | 0.000 |