scholarly journals Assessment and Comparison of Cervical Column Morphology and Cranial Base Angle in Three Different Facial Types – A Cephalometric Study

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (36) ◽  
pp. 2605-2609
Author(s):  
Anshuka Anshuka ◽  
Varsha Vaswani ◽  
Sahil Khajuria
Keyword(s):  
Cranial Base ◽  
Base Angle ◽  
Cephalometric Study ◽  
Facial Types

scholarly journals Evaluation of relationship between cranial base angle and maxillofacial morphology in Indian population: A cephalometric study

2014 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 74 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nishit Mehta ◽  
Harshik Parekh ◽  
Dolly Patel ◽  
Rahul Trivedi ◽  
Amarjitsingh Bhatia ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Indian Population ◽  
Cranial Base ◽  
Base Angle ◽  
Cephalometric Study

scholarly journals Length of anterior cranial base and Frankfort horizontal plane: A lateral cephalometric study in 11–16-year-old children

2018 ◽  
Vol 1073 ◽  
pp. 022014
Author(s):  
S B Budiardjo ◽  
A F Karim ◽  
S Indriati ◽  
N A Wahono ◽  
M Suharsini ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Horizontal Plane ◽  
Cranial Base ◽  
Anterior Cranial Base ◽  
Cephalometric Study ◽  
Frankfort Horizontal Plane

scholarly journals Craniofacial and Craniocervical Features in Cartilage-Hair Hypoplasia: A Radiological Study of 17 Patients and 34 Controls

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Heidi Arponen ◽  
Marjut Evälahti ◽  
Outi Mäkitie
Keyword(s):  
Skull Base ◽  
Cranial Base ◽  
Basilar Invagination ◽  
Craniocervical Junction ◽  
Skeletal Class ◽  
Base Angle ◽  
Cartilage Hair Hypoplasia ◽  
Skeletal Class Ii ◽  
Anterior Cranial Base ◽  
Age Range

BackgroundBiallelic mutations in the non-coding RNA gene RMRP cause Cartilage-hair hypoplasia (CHH), a rare skeletal dysplasia in which the main phenotypic characteristic is severe progressive growth retardation.ObjectiveThis study compared the cranial dimensions of individuals with CHH to healthy subjects.MethodsLateral skull radiographs of 17 patients with CHH (age range 10 to 59 years) and 34 healthy individuals (age range 10 to 54 years) were analyzed for relative position of the jaws to skull base, craniofacial height and depth, as well as vertical growth pattern of the lower jaw, anterior cranial base angle, and the relationship between the cervical spine and skull base.ResultsWe found that the length of the upper and lower jaws, and clivus were significantly decreased in patients with CHH as compared to the controls. Anterior cranial base angle was large in patients with CHH. Basilar invagination was not found.ConclusionThis study found no severe craniofacial involvement of patients with CHH, except for the short jaws. Unexpectedly, mandibular deficiency did not lead to skeletal class II malocclusion.Clinical ImpactAlthough the jaws were shorter in patients with CHH, they were proportional to each other. A short posterior cranial base was not associated with craniocervical junction pathology.

The Cranial Base Angle and Maxillary Hypoplasia in Unoperated Crouzon Patients

1996 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 69-70 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. M. Al-Qattan ◽  
John H. Phillips
Keyword(s):  
Cranial Base ◽  
Maxillary Hypoplasia ◽  
Base Angle

Cranial Base Morphology in Different Skeletal Classes : A Cross - Sectional Lateral Cephalometric Study

2013 ◽  
Vol 25 (Speacial Issue 1) ◽  
pp. 108-113
Author(s):  
Bilal I. Abd ◽  
Fakhri A. Ali
Keyword(s):  
Cranial Base ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Cephalometric Study

scholarly journals Cranial base characteristics in anteroposterior malocclusions: A meta-analysis

2015 ◽  
Vol 86 (4) ◽  
pp. 668-680 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aixiu Gong ◽  
Jing Li ◽  
Zhendong Wang ◽  
Yuan Li ◽  
Fang Hu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Class Ii ◽  
Cranial Base ◽  
Class I ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Base Length ◽  
Class Iii ◽  
Class Iii Malocclusion ◽  
Base Angle ◽  
Statistical Heterogeneity

ABSTRACT Objective:  To investigate cranial base characteristics in malocclusions with sagittal discrepancies. Materials and Methods:  An electronic search was performed in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library. A fixed- or random-effect model was applied to calculate weighted mean difference with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) according to statistical heterogeneity. Outcome measures were anterior, posterior, and total cranial base length and cranial base angle. Sensitivity analysis and publication bias were conducted. Results:  Twenty studies that together included 1121 Class I, 1051 Class II, and 730 Class III cases qualified for the final analysis. Class III malocclusion demonstrated significantly reduced anterior (95% CI: −1.74, −0.53; P < .001 vs Class I; 95% CI: −3.30, −2.09; P < .001 vs Class II) and total cranial base length (95% CI: −3.33, −1.36; P < .001 vs Class I; 95% CI: −7.38, −4.05; P < .001 vs Class II). Further, Class II patients showed significantly greater anterior and total cranial base length than did Class I patients (95% CI: 0.51, 1.87; P < .001 for SN; 95% CI: 2.20, 3.30; P < .001 for NBa). Cranial base angle was significantly smaller in Class III than in Class I (95% CI: −3.14, −0.93; P < .001 for NSBa; 95% CI: −2.73, −0.68; P  =  .001 for NSAr) and Class II malocclusions (95% CI: −5.73, −1.06; P  =  .004 for NSBa; 95% CI: −6.11, −1.92; P < .001 for NSAr) and greater in Class II than in Class I malocclusions (95% CI: 1.38, 2.38; P < .001 for NSBa). Conclusions:  This meta-analysis showed that anterior and total cranial base length and cranial base angle were significantly smaller in Class III malocclusion than in Class I and Class II malocclusions, and that they were greater in Class II subjects compared to controls.

Cranial Base Angle in Patients With Cleft Lip and Palate—A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
pp. 105566562110535
Author(s):  
Chandnee Murugan ◽  
Vignesh Kailasam
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Cleft Lip ◽  
Cleft Lip And Palate ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Cranial Base ◽  
Class I ◽  
Base Angle ◽  
Registration Number ◽  
Newcastle Ottawa Scale ◽  
Ottawa Scale

Background: Diverse findings have been reported for the cranial base angle (CBA) in patients with CLP (cleft lip and palate) and non-CLP controls. Objective: The aim of this study is to assess and evaluate the CBA in patients with CLP and non-CLP controls. Methods: Data from PubMed, OVID Technologies, Inc., Cochrane, Literatura Latino-Americana e do Caribe em Ciências da Saúde (LILACS), Scopus, Web of Science, and EMBASE for Excerpta Medica dataBASE (EMBASE) with relevant terms was extracted until December 31, 2020. Inclusion criteria were data of patients with non-syndromic unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP) and bilateral cleft lip and palate (BCLP). In the case of UCLP and BCLP, patients with craniofacial syndromes were excluded. The study proposal was registered with PROSPERO (Registration number: CRD42021228632). Results: Fifteen studies with a total of 2032 participants were included for the systematic review and 14 studies with a total of 1972 participants were included for the meta-analysis. The risk of bias was assessed using the Modified Newcastle Ottawa scale under seven domains by two authors. Thirteen studies were graded as “good” and two as “satisfactory.” The CBA in patients with CLP were greater than the non CLP Class I controls in six of the 15 studies. CBA was greater in patients with CLP than non-CLP controls by 1.21° (95% CI of 0.19-2.22). Meta-analysis reported considerable heterogeneity (I2 = 86%). Anterior (ACB) and posterior cranial base (PCB) lengths were shorter in patients with CLP than in the non-cleft Class I controls by 2.14 mm (95% CI of 0.99-3.30) and 2.06 mm (95% CI of 1.52-2.60), respectively. Conclusion: Most studies were graded as good. Patients with CLP had greater CBA and shorter ACB and PCB lengths when compared to non-CLP controls.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document