| Literature DB >> 34883821 |
Jong-Moon Chae1,2, Leah Rogowski2, Suchita Mandair2, R Curtis Bay3, Jae Hyun Park2,4.
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to evaluate midpalatal bone density (BD) by using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) according to gender, age, and vertical and horizontal skeletal patterns. CBCT images from 126 subjects (64 females and 62 males) were reoriented and analyzed in order to attain BD values at the midpalatal suture. Four age groups were used for classification (adolescence, 10 ≤ early < 14 years, 14 ≤ middle ≤ 17 years, and 17 < late ≤ 21 years; adult > 21 years). Vertical skeletal pattern categories were differentiated by the Frankfort horizontal line to mandibular plane angle (hypodivergent < 22°, 22° ≤ normovergent ≤ 28°, and 28° < hyperdivergent). Horizontal skeletal pattern differentiation was defined by ANB angle (Class III < 0°, 0° ≤ Class I ≤ 4°, and 4° < Class II). Females showed significantly higher BD than males (p < 0.001). As age increased, BD increased significantly (p < 0.001). There were no significant differences between vertical skeletal patterns. Class II showed significantly less BD than Class III (p < 0.05). With this information, clinicians can better understand BD trends of the midpalatal suture and, thus, better understand our patient's anatomy and potential hurdles in successful treatment.Entities:
Keywords: bone density; maxillary expansion; midpalatal suture; skeletal pattern
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34883821 PMCID: PMC8659514 DOI: 10.3390/s21237812
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
Figure 1Process of cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) image reorientation in the multiplanar orientation screen: (A) CBCT image was reorientated along the inferior border of the orbital rims in the frontal reconstructed view. (B,C) In the coronal and axial views, CBCT images were reoriented to allow for analysis at the midpalatal suture so that the green vertical line was positioned through the anterior nasal spine (ANS) to posterior nasal spine (PNS). (D) In the sagittal view, the CBCT image was rotated to confirm that the midpalatal line ran through ANS to PNS.
Figure 2Sagittal view for bone density measurements: (A) Cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) image was oriented so that the white vertical line was placed along the posterior border of the incisive foramen at an exit of the inferior canal. (B) The white vertical orientation line was then moved posteriorly by 1.56 mm to create the anterior limit for data collection.
Figure 3Using the “create graft volume” function, bone density was measured. The area was selected manually along the bone border.
Sample distribution (number).
| Variables | Gender | Age (y) | Mandibular Plane Angle (MPA) | ANB Angle | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| M | F | Adolescence | Adult | Hypodivergent | Normover-gent | Hyperdivergent | Class III | Class I | Class II | |||||
| Early | Middle | Late | ||||||||||||
| 10 ≤ y < 14 | 14 ≤ y ≤ 17 | 17 < y ≤ 21 | y > 21 | MPA < 22° | 22° ≤ MPA ≤ 28° | MPA > 28° | ANB < 0° | 0° ≤ ANB ≤ 4° | ANB > 4° | |||||
| Gender | Male | 62 | 13 | 21 | 13 | 15 | 19 | 23 | 20 | 23 | 24 | 15 | ||
| Female | 64 | 18 | 13 | 19 | 14 | 22 | 20 | 22 | 15 | 32 | 17 | |||
| Age | Early | 13 | 18 | 9 | 11 | 11 | 4 | 15 | 12 | |||||
| Adolescence | Middle | 21 | 13 | 11 | 12 | 11 | 7 | 16 | 11 | |||||
| Late | 13 | 19 | 10 | 11 | 11 | 16 | 12 | 4 | ||||||
| Adult | 15 | 14 | 11 | 9 | 9 | 11 | 13 | 5 | ||||||
| MPA | Hypodivergent | 19 | 22 | 9 | 11 | 10 | 11 | 14 | 19 | 8 | ||||
| Normovergent | 23 | 20 | 11 | 12 | 11 | 9 | 15 | 18 | 10 | |||||
| Hyperdivergent | 20 | 22 | 11 | 11 | 11 | 9 | 9 | 19 | 14 | |||||
| ANB | Class III | 23 | 15 | 4 | 7 | 16 | 11 | 14 | 15 | 9 | ||||
| Class I | 24 | 32 | 15 | 16 | 12 | 13 | 19 | 18 | 19 | |||||
| Class II | 15 | 17 | 12 | 11 | 4 | 5 | 8 | 10 | 14 | |||||
| Total (each) | 126 | 31 | 34 | 32 | 29 | 41 | 43 | 42 | 38 | 56 | 32 | |||
Midpalatal bone density (BD) according to gender and age (HU).
| Means (Standard Deviations) | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Variables | Gender | Age (y) | ||||
| Male | Female | Early: | Middle: | Late: | Adult: | |
| BD | 549.33 | 657.25 | 529.05 | 561.13 | 662.09 | 679.90 |
HU; Hounsfield units.
Midpalatal bone density (BD) according to skeletal patterns (HU).
| Means (Standard Deviations) | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Variables | Mandibular Plane Angle (MPA) | ANB Angle | ||||
| Hypodivergent | Normovergent | Hyperdivergent | Class III | Class I | Class II | |
| BD | 606.93 | 586.34 | 619.65 | 633.82 | 613.90 | 551.83 |
HU; Hounsfield units.
A generalized linear model is derived from comparing midpalatal bone densities (BDs) according to gender, age, and skeletal patterns.
| Variables | Mean BD Difference | 95% Wald Confidence Interval | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lower | Upper | |||
| Gender | ||||
| Male vs. Female | −108.75 | −140.25 | −77.25 | <0.001 *** |
| Age | ||||
| Early vs. Middle | −47.35 | −96.48 | 1.80 | 0.062 |
| Early vs. Late | −104.04 | −163.76 | −44.32 | <0.001 *** |
| Early vs. adult | −121.22 | −182.35 | −60.09 | <0.001 *** |
| Middle vs. Late | −56.69 | −110.93 | −2.46 | 0.037 * |
| Middle vs. Adult | −73.87 | −129.97 | −17.78 | 0.004 ** |
| Late vs. Adult | −17.18 | −61.50 | 27.14 | 0.447 |
| Vertical skeletal pattern | ||||
| Hypo vs. Normo | 15.74 | −21.74 | 53.22 | 0.410 |
| Hypo vs. Hyper | −28.14 | −71.63 | 15.35 | 0.294 |
| Normo vs. Hyper | −43.88 | −89.67 | 1.90 | 0.065 |
| Horizontal skeletal pattern | ||||
| Class I vs. Class II | 42.92 | −1.07 | 86.90 | 0.057 |
| Class I vs. Class III | −17.39 | −55.28 | 20.50 | 0.368 |
| Class II vs. Class III | −60.31 | −114.70 | −5.92 | 0.024 * |
HU; Hounsfield units. A vs. B means that the B score is subtracted from the A score. * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001.