The korean journal of orthodontics (대한치과교정학회지)

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

DOI QR Code

A scoping review of cephalometric normative data in children

  • Tuan Khang Nguyen (Dental Medicine and Oral Health Sciences, McGill University) ;
  • Akanksha Cambala (Dental Medicine and Oral Health Sciences, McGill University) ;
  • Manuela Hrit (Dental Medicine and Oral Health Sciences, McGill University) ;
  • Elizabeth A. Zimmermann (Dental Medicine and Oral Health Sciences, McGill University)
  • Received : 2023.10.27
  • Accepted : 2024.03.18
  • Published : 2024.07.25
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Objective: Understanding the orofacial characteristics and growth patterns in children is essential for both orthodontics and research on children with orofacial abnormalities. However, a concise resource of normative data on the size and relative position of these structures in different populations is not available. Our objective was to aggregate normative data to assess the growth of the orofacial skeletal structures in children with a well-balanced face and normal occlusion. Methods: The MEDLINE, Embase, and Scopus databases were searched. Inclusion criteria included longitudinal and cross-sectional studies on cephalometric measurement of skeletal tissues and a study population ≤ 18 years with a well-balanced face and normal occlusion. Key study parameters were extracted, and knowledge was synthesized. A quality appraisal was performed using a 10-point scale. Results: The final selection comprised of 12 longitudinal and 33 cross-sectional studies, the quality of which ranged from good to excellent. Our results showed that from childhood to adulthood, the length of the cranial base increased significantly while the cranial base angle remained constant; both the maxilla and mandible moved forward and downward. The profile becomes straighter with age. Conclusions: Growth patterns in children with a well-balanced face and normal occlusion follow accepted theories of growth.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

We would like to thank Prof. Svetlana Komarova, Vishakha Wijenayake, and Uzma Jamil, Ph.D. (McGill University) for their advice on manuscript preparation. We acknowledge the support of Genevieve Gore, a liaison librarian at the Schulich Library of Physical Sciences, Life Sciences, and Engineering at McGill University, for her assistance with the search.

References

  1. Bishara SE, Peterson LC, Bishara EC. Changes in facial dimensions and relationships between the ages of 5 and 25 years. Am J Orthod 1984;85:238-52. https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9416(84)90063-0 
  2. Ursi WJ, Trotman CA, McNamara JA Jr, Behrents RG. Sexual dimorphism in normal craniofacial growth. Angle Orthod 1993;63:47-56. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8507031/ 
  3. Bartzela TN, Carels C, Maltha JC. Update on 13 syndromes affecting craniofacial and dental structures. Front Physiol 2017;8:1038. https://doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2017.01038 
  4. Jacobson A, Jacobson RL. Radiographic cephalometry: from basics to 3-D imaging. Chicago: Quintessence Pub Co.; 2006. https://www.amazon.com/ Radiographic-Cephalometry-Basics-3-d-Imaging/dp/0867154616 
  5. Jodeh DS, Kuykendall LV, Ford JM, Ruso S, Decker SJ, Rottgers SA. Adding depth to cephalometric analysis: comparing two- and three-dimensional angular cephalometric measurements. J Craniofac Surg 2019;30:1568-71. https://doi.org/10.1097/SCS.0000000000005555 
  6. Thordarson A, Johannsdottir B, Magnusson TE. Craniofacial changes in Icelandic children between 6 and 16 years of age- a longitudinal study. Eur J Orthod 2006;28:152-65. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cji084 
  7. Bjork A, Skieller V. Normal and abnormal growth of the mandible. A synthesis of longitudinal cephalometric implant studies over a period of 25 years. Eur J Orthod 1983;5:1-46. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/5.1.1 
  8. Riolo ML. An Atlas of craniofacial growth: cephalometric standards from the University school growth study, the University of Michigan. Ann Arbor: Center for Human Growth and Development, University of Michigan; 1974. https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/handle/2027.42/146700 
  9. Thompson GW, Popovich F. A longitudinal evaluation of the Burlington growth centre data. J Dent Res 1977;56 Spec No:C71-8. https://doi.org/10.1177/002203457705600321011 
  10. Sherman SL, Woods M, Nanda RS, Currier GF. The longitudinal effects of growth on the Wits appraisal. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1988;93:429-36. https://doi.org/10.1016/0889-5406(88)90103-5 Erratum in: Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1988;94:178. 
  11. Enlow DH, Hans MG. Essentials of facial growth. Ann Arbor: Needham Press; 2008. https://search.worldcat.org/ko/title/essentials-of-facial-growth/oclc/430525503 
  12. Burr DB, Allen MR. Basic and applied bone biology. Cambridge: Academic Press; 2014. https://www.sciencedirect.com/book/9780124160156/basic-and-applied-bone-biology 
  13. Afrand M, Ling CP, Khosrotehrani S, Flores-Mir C, Lagravere-Vich MO. Anterior cranial-base time-related changes: a systematic review. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2014;146:21-32.e6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2014.03.019 
  14. Currie K, Sawchuk D, Saltaji H, Oh H, Flores-Mir C, Lagravere M. Posterior cranial base natural growth and development: a systematic review. Angle Orthod 2017;87:897-910. https://doi.org/10.2319/032717-218.1 
  15. Proffit WR, Fields HW, Larson B, Sarver DM. Contemporary orthodontics. St. Louis: Mosby; 2018. https://www.amazon.com/Contemporary-Orthodontics-William-Proffit-DDS/dp/0323543871 
  16. Costello BJ, Rivera RD, Shand J, Mooney M. Growth and development considerations for craniomaxillofacial surgery. Oral Maxillofac Surg Clin North Am 2012;24:377-96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coms.2012.05.007 
  17. Liu YP, Behrents RG, Buschang PH. Mandibular growth, remodeling, and maturation during infancy and early childhood. Angle Orthod 2010;80:97-105. https://doi.org/10.2319/020309-67.1 
  18. Broadbent BH, Golden WH. Bolton standards of dentofacial developmental growth. St. Louis: Mosby; 1975. https://search.worldcat.org/ko/title/Boltonstandards-of-dentofacial-developmental-growth/oclc/1207326 
  19. Arksey H, O'Malley L. Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. Int J Soc Res Methodol 2005;8:19-32. https://doi.org/10.1080/1364557032000119616 
  20. Levac D, Colquhoun H, O'Brien KK. Scoping studies: advancing the methodology. Implement Sci 2010;5:69. https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-5-69 
  21. Tricco AC, Lillie E, Zarin W, O'Brien KK, Colquhoun H, Levac D, et al. PRISMA extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR): checklist and explanation. Ann Intern Med 2018;169:467-73. https://doi.org/10.7326/M18-0850 
  22. Ouzzani M, Hammady H, Fedorowicz Z, Elmagarmid A. Rayyan-a web and mobile app for systematic reviews. Syst Rev 2016;5:210. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-016-0384-4 
  23. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI). Study quality assessment tools [Internet]. Bethesda: NHLBI; 2021 [cited 2022 Feb 17]. Available from: https://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/health-topics/study-quality-assessment-tools
  24. Pan XG, Liu HH, Cao HJ. [McNamara cephalometric analysis for Shanghai adolescents and adults]. Shanghai Kou Qiang Yi Xue 1996;5:195-7. Chinese. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15159982/ 
  25. Sobreira CR, Vilani GNL, de Siqueira VCV. Comparative study of facial proportions between Afro Brazilian and White Brazilian children from 8 to 10 years of age. Dental Press J Orthod 2011;16:85-93. https://doi.org/10.1590/S2176-94512011000200011 
  26. AlShayea EI, Almoammar K, Alsultan M, Albarakati SF. Skeleto-dental features among a sample of Saudi female children compared to British standards: a cephalometric study. Niger J Clin Pract 2022;25:454-65. https://doi.org/10.4103/njcp. njcp_1819_21 
  27. Chuang SY. Craniofacial growth changes of Mongolian children with normal occlusion from 8 to 12 years. Kaohsiung J Med Sci 2000;16:400-13. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11221544/ 
  28. Jimenez I, Villegas L, Salazar-Uribe JC, Alvarez LG. Facial growth changes in a Colombian Mestizo population: an 18-year follow-up longitudinal study using linear mixed models. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2020;157:365-76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2019.04.032 
  29. Chang HP, Kinoshita Z, Kawamoto T. A study of the growth changes in facial configuration. Eur J Orthod 1993;15:493-501. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/15.6.493 
  30. Stahl de Castrillon F, Baccetti T, Franchi L, Grabowski R, Klink-Heckmann U, McNamara JA. Lateral cephalometric standards of Germans with normal occlusion from 6 to 17 years of age. J Orofac Orthop 2013;74:236-56. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00056-013-0140-5 
  31. Moldez MA, Sato K, Sugawara J, Mitani H. Linear and angular Filipino cephalometric norms according to age and sex. Angle Orthod 2006;76:800-5. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17029513/ 
  32. Humerfelt A. A roentgenographic cephalometric investigation of Norwegian children with normal occlusion. Scand J Dent Res 1970;78:117-43. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0722.1970.tb02062.x 
  33. Obloj B, Fudalej P, Dudkiewicz Z. Cephalometric standards for Polish 10-year-olds with normal occlusion. Angle Orthod 2008;78:262-9. https://doi.org/10.2319/011207-14.1 
  34. Bishara SE, Abdalla EM, Hoppens BJ. Cephalometric comparisons of dentofacial parameters between Egyptian and North American adolescents. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1990;97:413-21. https://doi.org/10.1016/0889-5406(90)70113-Q 
  35. Aleksic E, Lalic M, Milic J, Gajic M, Stankovic Z, Jevremovic D, et al. Cephalometric standards for 9 year-old Serbian children with neutroocclusion. Acta Stomatol Naissi 2012;28:1155-63. https://doi.org/10.5937/asn1265155A 
  36. El-Batran M, Soliman N, El-Wakil Kh. The relationship between cranial base and maxillo-facial morphology in Egyptian children. Homo 2008;59:287-300. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jchb.2008.06.004 
  37. Zhao XG, Hans MG, Palomo JM, Lin JX. Comparison of Chinese and white Bolton standards at age 13. Angle Orthod 2013;83:809-16. https://doi.org/10.2319/110412-849.1 
  38. Barter MA, Evans WG, Smit GL, Becker PJ. Cephalometric analysis of a Sotho-Tswana group. J Dent Assoc S Afr 1995;50:539-44. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8613579/ 
  39. Thilander B, Persson M, Adolfsson U. Roentgencephalometric standards for a Swedish population. A longitudinal study between the ages of 5 and 31 years. Eur J Orthod 2005;27:370-89. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cji033 
  40. Al-Taai N, Persson M, Ransjo M, Levring Jaghagen E, Fors R, Westerlund A. Craniofacial changes from 13 to 62 years of age. Eur J Orthod 2022;44:556-65. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjac011 
  41. el-Batouti A, Ogaard B, Bishara SE. Longitudinal cephalometric standards for Norwegians between the ages of 6 and 18 years. Eur J Orthod 1994;16:501-9. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/16.6.501 
  42. Thilander B, Persson M, Skagius S. Roentgencephalometric standards for the facial skeleton and soft tissue profile of Swedish children and young adults. II. Comparisons with earlier Scandinavian normative data. Swed Dent J Suppl 1982;15:219-28. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/6963777/ 
  43. Jamison JE, Bishara SE, Peterson LC, DeKock WH, Kremenak CR. Longitudinal changes in the maxilla and the maxillary-mandibular relationship between 8 and 17 years of age. Am J Orthod 1982;82:217-30. https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9416(82)90142-7 
  44. Hamamci N, Basaran G, Kiralp S, Sahin S, Selek M, Arslan S. Longitudinal study of untreated skeletal Class I subject's growth and development with Mc Namara cephalometric analysis. Biotechnol Biotechnol Equip 2006;20:175-83. https://doi.org/10.1080/13102818.2006.10817398 
  45. Alio-Sanz J, Iglesias-Conde C, Pernia JL, IglesiasLinares A, Mendoza-Mendoza A, Solano-Reina E. Retrospective study of maxilla growth in a Spanish population sample. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal 2011;16:e271-7. https://doi.org/10.4317/medoral.16.e271 
  46. Anuradha, Taneja JR, Chopra SL, Gupta A. Steiner's norms for North Indian pre-school children. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent 1991;8:36-7. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/2056345/ 
  47. Ajayi EO. Cephalometric norms of Nigerian children. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2005;128:653-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2005.07.002 
  48. Huang WJ, Taylor RW, Dasanayake AP. Determining cephalometric norms for Caucasians and African Americans in Birmingham. Angle Orthod 1998;68:503-11; discussion 512. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9851347/ 
  49. Kapila S. Selected cephalometric angular norms in Kikuyu children. Angle Orthod 1989;59:139-44. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/2729667/ 
  50. de Freitas LM, Pinzan A, Janson G, Freitas KM, de Freitas MR, Henriques JF. Facial height comparison in young white and black Brazilian subjects with normal occlusion. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2007;131:706.e1-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2006.10.013 
  51. Bishara SE, Fernandez AG. Cephalometric comparisons of the dentofacial relationships of two adolescent populations from Iowa and northern Mexico. Am J Orthod 1985;88:314-22. https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9416(85)90131-9 
  52. Janson G, Quaglio CL, Pinzan A, Franco EJ, de Freitas MR. Craniofacial characteristics of Caucasian and Afro-Caucasian Brazilian subjects with normal occlusion. J Appl Oral Sci 2011;19:118-24. https://doi.org/10.1590/s1678-77572011000200007 
  53. Hassan AH. Cephalometric norms for the Saudi children living in the western region of Saudi Arabia: a research report. Head Face Med 2005;1:5. https://doi.org/10.1186/1746-160X-1-5 
  54. Gleis R, Brezniak N, Lieberman M. Israeli cephalometric standards compared to Downs and Steiner analyses. Angle Orthod 1990;60:35-40; discussion 41. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/2316902/ 
  55. Kilic N, Catal G, Oktay H. McNamara norms for Turkish adolescents with balanced faces and normal occlusion. Aust Orthod J 2010;26:33-7. https://doi.org/10.2478/aoj-2010-0006 
  56. Singh I, Kumar KK, Raj P, Babu RH, Pithani N, Thekiya AH. Cephalometric evaluation of natural head position in Lingayat population of Karnataka. J Pharm Bioallied Sci 2019;11(Suppl 1):S59-66. https://doi.org/10.4103/jpbs.JPBS_194_18 
  57. Storniolo-Souza JM, Seminario MP, Pinzan-Vercelino CRM, Pinzan A, Janson G. McNamara analysis cephalometric parameters in White-Brazilians, Japanese and Japanese-Brazilians with normal occlusion. Dental Press J Orthod 2021;26:e2119133. https://doi.org/10.1590/2177-6709.26.1.e2119133.oar 
  58. Vieira FP, Pinzan A, Janson G, Fernandes TM, Sathler RC, Henriques RP. Facial height in Japanese-Brazilian descendants with normal occlusion. Dental Press J Orthod 2014;19:54-66. https://doi.org/10.1590/2176-9451.19.5.054-066.oar 
  59. Folaranmi N, Isiekwe M. Anterior face height values in a Nigerian population. Ann Med Health Sci Res 2013;3:583-7. https://doi.org/10.4103/2141-9248.122121 
  60. Singh Rathore A, Dhar V, Arora R, Diwanji A. Cephalometric norms for Mewari children using Steiner's analysis. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2012;5:173-7. https://doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10005-1161 
  61. el-Batouti A, Bishara S, Ogaard B, Jakobsen J. Dentofacial changes in Norwegian and Iowan populations between 6 and 18 years of age. Eur J Orthod 1995;17:241-9. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/17.3.241 
  62. Hamdan AM, Rock WP. Cephalometric norms in an Arabic population. J Orthod 2001;28:297-300. https://doi.org/10.1093/ortho/28.4.297 
  63. Alexander TL, Hitchcock HP. Cephalometric standards for American Negro children. Am J Orthod 1978;74:298-304. https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9416(78)90205-1 
  64. Beugre JB, Sonan NK, Beugre-Kouassi AM, Djaha F. Comparative cephalometric study of three different ethnic groups of black Africa with normal occlusion. Odontostomatol Trop 2007;30:34-44. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17654886/ 
  65. de Freitas LM, de Freitas KM, Pinzan A, Janson G, de Freitas MR. A comparison of skeletal, dentoalveolar and soft tissue characteristics in white and black Brazilian subjects. J Appl Oral Sci 2010;18:135-42. https://doi.org/10.1590/s1678-77572010000200007 
  66. Gu Y, Hagg U, Wu J, Yeung S. Differences in dentofacial characteristics between southern versus northern Chinese adolescents. Aust Orthod J 2011;27:155-61. https://doi.org/10.2478/aoj-2011-0020 
  67. Barbosa LAG, Araujo E, Behrents RG, Buschang PH. Longitudinal cephalometric growth of untreated subjects with Class II Division 2 malocclusion. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2017;151:914-20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2016.10.026 
  68. Bjork A. Sutural growth of the upper face studied by the implant method. Acta Odontol Scand 1966;24:109-27. https://doi.org/10.3109/00016356609026122 
  69. Lowrey GH, Watson EH. Growth and development of children. Chicago: Year Book Medical Publishers;1973. https://search.worldcat.org/ko/title/624826 
  70. Hardin AM, Valiathan M, Oh H, Knigge RP, McNulty KP, Leary EV, et al. Clinical implications of age-related change of the mandibular plane angle. Orthod Craniofac Res 2020;23:50-8. https://doi.org/10.1111/ocr.12342 
  71. Hardin AM, Knigge RP, Oh H, Duren DL, Valiathan M, McNulty KP, et al. Growth-related change in the mandibular plane angle with clinical implications [Internet]. Columbia, MO: University of Missouri Health Care; 2018 [cited 2023 May 1]. Available from: https://hdl.handle.net/10355/66591 
  72. Nahhas RW, Valiathan M, Sherwood RJ. Variation in timing, duration, intensity, and direction of adolescent growth in the mandible, maxilla, and cranial base: the Fels longitudinal study. Anat Rec (Hoboken) 2014;297:1195-207. https://doi.org/10.1002/ar.22918 
  73. Marchiori GE, Sodre LO, da Cunha TCR, Torres FC, Rosario HD, Paranhos LR. Pleasantness of facial profile and its correlation with soft tissue cephalometric parameters: perception of orthodontists and lay people. Eur J Dent 2015;9:352-5. https://doi.org/10.4103/1305-7456.163323