The korean journal of orthodontics (대한치과교정학회지)

The Korean Association Of Orthodontists (대한치과교정학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Application of the foramina of the trigeminal nerve as landmarks for analysis of craniofacial morphology

  • Lim, Ba-Da (Department of Orthodontics, College of Dentistry, Gangneung-Wonju National University) ;
  • Choi, Dong-Soon (Department of Orthodontics, College of Dentistry, Gangneung-Wonju National University) ;
  • Jang, Insan (Department of Orthodontics, College of Dentistry, Gangneung-Wonju National University) ;
  • Cha, Bong-Kuen (Department of Orthodontics, College of Dentistry, Gangneung-Wonju National University)
  • Received : 2019.01.07
  • Accepted : 2019.06.22
  • Published : 2019.09.25
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Objective: The objective of this study was to develop new parameters based on the foramina of the trigeminal nerve and to compare them with the conventional cephalometric parameters in different facial skeletal types. Methods: Cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans and cephalograms from 147 adult patients (57 males and 90 females; mean age, 26.1 years) were categorized as Class I ($1^{\circ}$ < ANB < $3^{\circ}$), Class II (ANB > $5^{\circ}$), and Class III (ANB < $-1^{\circ}$). Seven foramina in the craniofacial area-foramen rotundum (Rot), foramen ovale (Ov), infraorbital foramen, greater palatine foramen, incisive foramen (IF), mandibular foramen (MDF), and mental foramen (MTF)-were identified in the CBCT images. Various linear, angular, and ratio parameters were compared between the groups by using the foramina, and the relationship between the new parameters and the conventional cephalometric parameters was assessed. Results: The distances between the foramina in the cranial base did not differ among the three groups. However, the Rot-IF length was shorter in female Class III patients, while the Ov-MTF length, MDF-MTF length, and Ov-MDF length were shorter in Class II patients than in Class III patients of both sexes. The MDF-MTF/FH plane angle was larger in Class II patients than in Class III patients of both sexes. Most parameters showed moderate to high correlations, but the Ov-MDF-MTF angle showed a relatively low correlation with the gonial angle. Conclusions: The foramina of the trigeminal nerve can be used to supplement assessments based on the conventional skeletal landmarks on CBCT images.

Keywords

References

  1. Downs WB. The role of cephalometrics in orthodontic case analysis and diagnosis. Am J Orthod 1952;38:162-82. https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9416(52)90106-1
  2. Ricketts RM. Cephalometric synthesis: an exercise in stating objectives and planning treatment with tracings of the head roentgenogram. Am J Orthod 1960;46:647-73. https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9416(60)90172-X
  3. Ricketts RM. A foundation for cephalometric communication. Am J Orthod 1960;46:330-57. https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9416(60)90047-6
  4. Steiner CC. Cephalometrics for you and me. Am J Orthod 1953;39:729-55. https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9416(53)90082-7
  5. Steiner CC. Cephalometrics in clinical practice. Angle Orthod 1959;29:8-29.
  6. Adams JW. Correction of error in cephalometric roentgenograms. Angle Orthod 1940;10:3-13.
  7. Graber TM. Problems and limitations of cephalometric analysis in orthodontics. J Am Dent Assoc 1956;53:439-54. https://doi.org/10.14219/jada.archive.1956.0204
  8. Houston WJ. The analysis of errors in orthodontic measurements. Am J Orthod 1983;83:382-90. https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9416(83)90322-6
  9. Captier G, Lethuilier J, Oussaid M, Canovas F, Bonnel F. Neural symmetry and functional asymmetry of the mandible. Surg Radiol Anat 2006;28:379-86. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00276-006-0104-1
  10. Kim SJ, Lee KJ, Lee SH, Baik HS. Morphologic relationship between the cranial base and the mandible in patients with facial asymmetry and mandibular prognathism. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2013;144:330-40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2013.03.024
  11. Lagravere MO, Gordon JM, Flores-Mir C, Carey J, Heo G, Major PW. Cranial base foramen location accuracy and reliability in cone-beam computerized tomography. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2011;139:e203-10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2009.06.027
  12. Ludlow JB, Laster WS, See M, Bailey LJ, Hershey HG. Accuracy of measurements of mandibular anatomy in cone beam computed tomography images. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2007;103:534-42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tripleo.2006.04.008
  13. Cutright B, Quillopa N, Schubert W. An anthropometric analysis of the key foramina for maxillofacial surgery. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2003;61:354-7. https://doi.org/10.1053/joms.2003.50070
  14. Scammon RE. The measurement of the body in childhood. In: Harris J, Jackson C, Paterson D, Scammon RE, eds. The measurement of man. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota; 1930.
  15. Bjork A. Prediction of mandibular growth rotation. Am J Orthod 1969;55:585-99. https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9416(69)90036-0
  16. Gudmundsson K, Rhoton AL Jr, Rushton JG. Detailed anatomy of the intracranial portion of the trigeminal nerve. J Neurosurg 1971;35:592-600. https://doi.org/10.3171/jns.1971.35.5.0592
  17. Gray H, Warwick R, Williams PL. Gray's anatomy. 35th ed. London: Longman; 1973.
  18. Dahlberg G. Statistical methods for medical and biological students. New York: Interscience Publications;1940.
  19. Behrents RG, Johnston LE Jr. The influence of the trigeminal nerve on facial growth and development. Am J Orthod 1984;85:199-206. https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9416(84)90059-9
  20. Gardner DE, Luschei ES, Joondeph DR. Alterations in the facial skeleton of the guinea pig following a lesion of the trigeminal motor nucleus. Am J Orthod 1980;78:66-80. https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9416(80)90040-8
  21. Moss ML. Neurotrophic processes in orofacial growth. J Dent Res 1971;50:1492-4. https://doi.org/10.1177/00220345710500062301
  22. Moss ML. An introduction to the neurobiology of oro-facial growth. Acta Biotheor 1972;21:236-59. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01557180
  23. Pimenidis MZ, Gianelly AA. Class III malocclusion produced by oral facial sensory deprivation in the rat. Am J Orthod 1977;71:94-102. https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9416(77)90179-8
  24. Sarnat BG, Feigenbaum JA, Krogman WM. Adult monkey coronoid process after resection of trigeminal nerve motor root. Am J Anat 1977;150:129-37. https://doi.org/10.1002/aja.1001500109
  25. Kasai K, Moro T, Kanazawa E, Iwasawa T. Relationship between cranial base and maxillofacial morphology. Eur J Orthod 1995;17:403-10. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/17.5.403
  26. Sassouni V. A classification of skeletal facial types. Am J Orthod 1969;55:109-23. https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9416(69)90122-5
  27. Schudy FF. Vertical growth versus anteroposterior growth as related to function and treatment. Angle Orthod 1964;34:75-93.
  28. Sanborn RT. Differences between the facial skeletal patterns of Class III malocclusion and normal occlusion. Angle Orthod 1955;25:208-22.
  29. Minich CM, Araujo EA, Behrents RG, Buschang PH, Tanaka OM, Kim KB. Evaluation of skeletal and dental asymmetries in Angle Class II subdivision malocclusions with cone-beam computed tomography. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2013;144:57-66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2013.02.026