Correlating Cranial Base Flexure And Posterior Cranial Base Length With Vertical Skeletal Patterns


Correlating Cranial Base Flexure And Posterior Cranial Base Length With Vertical Skeletal Patterns


Anuradha Rawat, Sanjeev Datana, SS Agarwal, Vishvaroop, SK Bhandari

Department of Orthodontics & Dentofacial Orthopedics, Armed forces medical college, Pune, India


American Journal of Geographical Research and Reviews

Background: The cranial base has pivotal role in development of craniofacial structures. Both anterior and posterior cranial bases and the angle between the two affect the position of maxilla and mandible. Objectives: To evaluate the effect of cranial base angle and posterior cranial base length in various vertical facial types. Methodology: The study sample consisted of pre-treatment lateral cephalogram of 135 subjects (63 males and 72 females, age 14-21 years) with skeletal class I pattern. These were divided into three groups of normodivergent, hypodivergent and hyperdivergent facial types with 45 subjects in each group. Two angular parameters i.e Saddle angle (NSAr) and Articular angle (SArGo) and one linear parameter Posterior cranial base length (SAr) were used in cephalometric analysis. Inter-group comparison of means of all measurements were studied using ANOVA with Bonferroni’s correction for multiple group comparison. Results: Saddle angle and articular angle did not show significant difference across three study groups. Highly significant difference in posterior cranial base length was observed between hypodivergent and hyperdivergent groups. Saddle angle and Posterior Cranial base length showed significant positive correlation in hypodivergent whereas Saddle angle and Articular angle showed significant negative correlation in hypodivergent and hyperdivergent groups. Conclusion: The cranial base angle does not affect the vertical facial patterns but posterior cranial base length does affect the hyperdivergent and hypodivergent facial types. Cranial base angle found to correlate with posterior cranial base in hypodivergent facial pattern whereas Saddle angle correlated negatively with articular angle in both hyperdivergent and hypodivergent facial types.


Keywords: Cranial base angle, Saddle angle, Cranial base flexure

Free Full-text PDF


How to cite this article:
Anuradha Rawat, Sanjeev Datana, SS Agarwal, Vishvaroop, SK Bhandari. Correlating Cranial Base Flexure And Posterior Cranial Base Length With Vertical Skeletal Patterns. International Journal of Dental Research and Reviews, 2019, 2:13.


References:

1. Bjork A. Cranial base development: a follow-up X-ray study of the individual variation in growth occurring between the ages of 12 and 20 years and its relation to brain case and face development. Am J Orthod 1955;41:198–225.
2. Kerr WJS. A method of superimposing serial lateral cephalometric films for the purpose of comparison: a preliminary report. Br J Orthod.1978;5:51–53.
3. Enlow DH. Crescimento facial. 3ª ed. Sao Paulo: Artes Médicas; 1993.
4. Renfroe E. Study of facial pattern associated with class I, class II Div 1 and class II Div 2 malocclusions. Angle Orthod. 1948;18:12–5.
5. Bjork A. Some biological aspects of prognathism and occlusion of the teeth. Acta Odontol Scand. 1950;9:1–40.
6. Coben SE. The integration of facial skeletal variants. Am J Orthod. 1955;41:407–34.
7. Moss ML. Correlation of cranial base angulation with cephalic malformations and growth disharmonies of dental interest. NY State Dent J. 1955;24:452–54.
8. Hopkin GD. The growth factor in the prognosis of treated case of angle class III malocclusion. Trans Eur Orthod Soc. 1965;41:353–65.
9. Anderson DL, Popovich F. Correlations among craniofacial angles and dimensions in Class I and Class II malocclusions. Angle Orthod 1989;59:37-42.
10. Young M, Bryce TH. IX. A contribution to the study of the Scottish skull. Trans R Soc Edinburgh 1917;51:347–454.
11. Ricketts R M. Facial denture changes during orthodontic treatment as analysed from the temporomandibular joint.Am J Orthod.1955;41:163-179.
12. Hopkin G B. Mesio-occlusion, a clinical and roentgenographic cephalometric study. Ph.D Thesis. Univ.Edin.1967.
13. James G A. Cephalometric analysis of 100 classII div 1 malocclusion with special reference to the cranial base.Dent.Pract.1963;14:35-46.
14. Houston W J B. A cephalometric analysis of angle class II div 2 malocclusion in the mixed dentition.Dent.Pract.1967;17:372-376.
15. Battagel J. The aetiology of Class III malocclusion examined by tensor analysis. Br J Orthod 1993;20:283–95.
16. Kasai K, Moro T, Kanazawa E, Iwasawa T. Relationship between cranial base and maxillofacial morphology. Eur J Orthod 1995;175:403–10.
17. Dhopatkar A, Bhatia S, Rock P. An investigation into the relationship between the cranial base angle and malocclusion. Angle Orthod 2002;725:456–63.
18. Polat O, Kaya B. Changes in cranial base morphology in different malocclusions. Orthod Craniofac Res 2007;10:216–21.
19. Enlow DH. Facial Growth, 3rd ed. Philadelphia: WB Saunders, 1990; p. 54-59.
20. Opdebeeck H, Bell WH. The short face syndrome. Am J Orthod 1978;73(5):499-510.
21. Rakosi T. An atlas and manual of cephalometric radiography. London: Wolfe Medical Publications Ltd.; 1982.
22. Anderson D, Popovich F. Relation of cranial base flexure to cranial form and mandibular position. Am J Phys Anthropol. 1983;61:181–87.
23. Carvajal-Carmona LG, Soto ID, Pineda N, et al. Strong Amerind/ white sex bias and a possible Sephardic contribution among the founders of a population in northwest Colombia. Am J Hum Genet. 2000;67:1287–95.
24. Hopkin GB, Houston WJB, James GA. The cranial base as an etiological factor in malocclusion. Angle Orthod. 1968;38:250–255.
25. Subtelny JD, Sakuda M. Open-bite: diagnosis and treatment. Am J Orthod 1964;50:337–58.
26. Xiao D, Gao H, Ren Y. Craniofacial morphological characteristics of Chinese adults with normal occlusion and different skeletal divergence. Eur J Orthod 2011;33:198–204.
27. Bacon W, Eiller V, Hildwein M, Dubois G. The cranial base in subjects with dental and skeletal class II. Eur J Orthod. 1992;14:224–228.
28. Dibbets J. Morphological associations between the Angle classes. Eur J Orthod 1996;18:111–8.