Article

Breathing mode influence in craniofacial development.

School of Dental Sciences, Ribeirão Preto-USP.
Brazilian journal of otorhinolaryngology (Impact Factor: 0.55). 04/2005; 71(2):156-60. DOI: 10.1590/S0034-72992005000200007
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The aim of this study was to evaluate the differences in facial proportions of nose and mouth breathing children using cephalometric analysis.
Transversal cohort.
Sixty cephalometric radiographs from pediatric patients aged 6 to 10 years were used. After otorhinolaryngological evaluation, patients were divided into two groups: Group I, with mouth breathing children and group II, with nose breathers. Standard lateral cephalometric radiographs were obtained to evaluate facial proportions using the following measures: SN.GoGn, ArGo.GoMe, N-Me, N-ANS, ANS-Me and S-Go; and the following indexes: PFH-AFH ratio: S-Go/N-Me; LFH-AFH ratio: ANS-Me/N-Me and UFH-LFH ratio: N-ANS/ANS-Me.
It was observed that the measurements for the inclination of the mandibular plane (SN.GoGn) in mouth breathing children were statistically higher than those in nasal breathing children. The posterior facial height was statistically smaller than the anterior one in mouth breathing children (PFH-AFH ratio). Thus, the upper anterior facial height was statistically smaller than the lower facial height (UFH-LFH ratio).
We concluded that mouth breathing children tend to have higher mandibular inclination and more vertical growth. These findings support the influence of the breathing mode in craniofacial development.

1 Bookmark
 · 
143 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The aims of the present study were to evaluate the association between breastfeeding and breathing development and to investigate associations between breastfeeding duration and the breathing patterns in children. A cross-sectional study was carried out at the Institute of Integrative Medicine Professor Fernando Figueira, Recife, Brazil, with a random sample of 732 children aged between 6 and 9 years. Breastfeeding and breathing patterns were identified using a questionnaire that was filled out by mothers or guardians, and a clinical examination of the children. Data were analyzed statistically by Pearson's chi-square test at 5 % significance level. The prevalence of mouth breathing was 48 %, whereas 52 % of the children were nasal breathers. Six hundred-forty children were breastfed; 46.2 % of them were mouth breathers and 53.8 % were nasal breathers. Ninety-two children were not breastfed; 59.8 % of them were mouth breathers and 40.2 % were nasal breathers. Breastfeeding for 24 months or more, as well as exclusive breastfeeding in the first 6 months, was associated with the development of nasal breathing. Conclusions Extended breastfeeding was associated with correct development of the breathing pattern.
    European Journal of Pediatrics 12/2012; · 1.98 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Mammalian, including human, neonates are considered to be obligate nose breathers. When constrained to breathe through their mouth in response to obstructed or closed nasal passages, the effects are pervasive and profound, and sometimes last into adulthood. The present paper briefly surveys neonates' and infants' responses to this atypical mobilisation of the mouth for breathing and focuses on comparisons between human newborns and infants and the neonatal rat model. We present the effects of forced oral breathing on neonatal rats induced by experimental nasal obstruction. We assessed the multilevel consequences on physiological, structural, and behavioural variables, both during and after the obstruction episode. The effects of the compensatory mobilisation of oral resources for breathing are discussed in the light of the adaptive development of oromotor functions.
    International Journal of Pediatrics 01/2012; 2012:207605.
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The aim of this study was to evaluate differences in craniofacial morphology, head posture and hyoid bone position between mouth breathing (MB) and nasal breathing (NB) patients. Mouth breathing patients comprised 34 skeletal Class I subjects with a mean age of 12.8 ± 1.5 years (range: 12.0-15.2 years). Thirty-two subjects with skeletal Class I relationship were included in the NB group (mean 13.5 ± 1.3 years; range: 12.2-14.8 years). Twenty-seven measurements (15 angular and 12 linear) were used for the craniofacial analysis. Additionally, 12 measurements were evaluated for head posture (eight measurements) and hyoid bone position (four measurements). Student's t-test was used for the statistical analysis. Probability values <0.05 were accepted as significant. Statistical comparisons showed that sagittal measurements including SNA (p < 0.01), ANB (p < 0.01), A to N perp (p < 0.05), convexity (p < 0.05), IMPA (p < 0.05) and overbite (p < 0.05) measurements were found to be lower in MB patients compared to NB. Vertical measurements including SN-MP (p < 0.01) and PP-GoGn (p < 0.01), S-N (p <0.05) and anterior facial height (p < 0.05) were significantly higher in MB patients, while the odontoid proses and palatal plane angle (OPT-PP) was greater and true vertical line and palatal plane angle (Vert-PP) was smaller in MB patients compared to NB group (p < 0.05 for both). No statistically significant differences were found regarding the hyoid bone position between both groups. The maxilla was more retrognathic in MB patients. Additionally, the palatal plane had a posterior rotation in MB patients. However, no significant differences were found in the hyoid bone position between MB and NB patients.
    Saudi Dental Journal 07/2012; 24(3-4):135-41.

Full-text (2 Sources)

Download
11 Downloads
Available from
Sep 2, 2014