4.3 Article

The effect of adenoid hypertrophy on maxillofacial development: an objective photographic analysis

Journal

Publisher

BIOMED CENTRAL LTD
DOI: 10.1186/s40463-016-0161-3

Keywords

Adenoid hypertrophy; Mouth breathing; Photographic analysis; Facial morphology

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Deformity in the dental arc and facial skeleton by adenoid hypertrophy due to chronic mouth breathing is a well-known process. Most of the related studies have been based on cephalometric analyses. The aim of this study is to detect the presence of skeletal deformities on the soft tissue by analyzing distances and angles on photographs. Methods: Ninety-seven children having between 25 and 100 % of adenoids, ages 4-12 years (48 boys, 49 girls), and 90 cases having 0-25 % adenoid tissue, ages 4-12 years (54 boys, 36 girls), were studied by clinical history, physical examination (including endoscopy), and standardized clinical photographs. The children and parents were asked if any of the following were present in the children: snoring, sleep apnea, daytime sleepiness, poor school performance, mouth breathing during sleep, smoking parents, and restlessness during sleep. Results: The assessment of linear and angular measurements on the clinical photographs showed, in the group having thicker adenoids compared with controls, a statistically significant increase in the distance between nasion and tip and nasion and subnasale and in the angle between Frankfort horizontal plane-gnathion-angulus mandible; there was also a statistically significant decrease in the distance between endocanthion and exocanthion and the angles between tragion-angulus mandible and gnathion and between nasion-angulus mandible and gnathion. Conclusions: The analyses showed a significant increase in the anterior face height and increase in the angle between Frankfort horizontal plane-gnathion-angulus mandible and a retropositioned and posterior-rotated mandible due to thicker adenoids.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available