Jhonatan Thiago Lacerda-Santos1, Gélica Lima Granja2, George Borja de Freitas3, Luiz Roberto Coutinho Manhães4, Daniela Pita de Melo2, Jalber Almeida Dos Santos5. 1. Postgraduate Program in Dentistry, State University of Paraiba, Campina Grande, Paraíba, Brazil. thiiagolacerda@gmail.com. 2. Postgraduate Program in Dentistry, State University of Paraiba, Campina Grande, Paraíba, Brazil. 3. Department of Dentistry, UNIFIP University Center of Patos, Patos, Paraíba, Brazil. 4. Department of Radiology, São Leopoldo Mandic College, Campinas, São Paulo, Brazil. 5. Department of Dentistry, FIP Campina Grande, Campina Grande, Paraíba, Brazil.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess the morphology and location of the great palatine foramen (GPF) of different facial types using cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans. METHODS: Sixty CBCT scans were divided into: brachyfacial (n = 20), dolichofacial (n = 20) and mesofacial (n = 20) using Ricketts' VERT index for the determination of cephalometric facial type and imported into ImageJ software. GPF shape was characterized as: round, elongated in the anteroposterior direction (EAP), or elongated in the latero-medial direction (ELM). The distances between the GPF and the palatine suture (PS), the center of the GPF and the center incisive foramen (IF), the GPF and the palatine alveolar ridge (PAR), right side GPF (GPFr) and left side (GPFl) GPFs; and the angles formed from the intersection of the GPF, IF and PS were assessed. The position of the GPF was evaluated in relation to the molars. RESULTS: GPFr and GPFl mean distances from PAR presented higher values for dolichofacial patients (p < 0.05). GPFr and GPFl location distally to the third molar (3 M) was higher for brachyfacial type, while their location distally to the second molar was higher for mesofacial and between the mesial and distal surfaces of the 3 M for dolichofacial (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The GPF was more distant from the PAR in the dolichofacial-type group. The location of the GPF in relation to the molars varied according to the facial type. However, the morphology of the GPF was similar in the three facial types, and the elongated in the anteroposterior direction morphology was more frequent.
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess the morphology and location of the great palatine foramen (GPF) of different facial types using cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans. METHODS: Sixty CBCT scans were divided into: brachyfacial (n = 20), dolichofacial (n = 20) and mesofacial (n = 20) using Ricketts' VERT index for the determination of cephalometric facial type and imported into ImageJ software. GPF shape was characterized as: round, elongated in the anteroposterior direction (EAP), or elongated in the latero-medial direction (ELM). The distances between the GPF and the palatine suture (PS), the center of the GPF and the center incisive foramen (IF), the GPF and the palatine alveolar ridge (PAR), right side GPF (GPFr) and left side (GPFl) GPFs; and the angles formed from the intersection of the GPF, IF and PS were assessed. The position of the GPF was evaluated in relation to the molars. RESULTS: GPFr and GPFl mean distances from PAR presented higher values for dolichofacial patients (p < 0.05). GPFr and GPFl location distally to the third molar (3 M) was higher for brachyfacial type, while their location distally to the second molar was higher for mesofacial and between the mesial and distal surfaces of the 3 M for dolichofacial (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The GPF was more distant from the PAR in the dolichofacial-type group. The location of the GPF in relation to the molars varied according to the facial type. However, the morphology of the GPF was similar in the three facial types, and the elongated in the anteroposterior direction morphology was more frequent.
Authors: O Rapado-González; J A Suárez-Quintanilla; X L Otero-Cepeda; A Fernández-Alonso; M M Suárez-Cunqueiro Journal: Surg Radiol Anat Date: 2015-06-24 Impact factor: 1.246
Authors: José Antonio Alarcón; Miguel Velasco-Torres; Antonio Rosas; Pablo Galindo-Moreno; Andrés Catena Journal: Clin Oral Investig Date: 2020-02-07 Impact factor: 3.573
Authors: Iwona M Tomaszewska; Krzysztof A Tomaszewski; Elizabeth K Kmiotek; Iwona Z Pena; Andrzej Urbanik; Michał Nowakowski; Jerzy A Walocha Journal: J Anat Date: 2014-08-05 Impact factor: 2.610
Authors: Manil C N Fonseka; P V Kalani S Hettiarachchi; Rasika M Jayasinghe; Ruwan D Jayasinghe; C Deepthi Nanayakkara Journal: J Oral Biol Craniofac Res Date: 2019-06-25