Breathing mode influence in craniofacial development.

School of Dental Sciences, Ribeirão Preto-USP.
Brazilian journal of otorhinolaryngology (Impact Factor: 0.62). 04/2005; 71(2):156-60.
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
  • [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
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objective to determine the influence of the chronic retro nasal airway obstruction on craniofacial morphology Methods it was a case control study which included fifty-eight melanoderm children aged from 3 to 6 years (31 males and 27 females), divided in 2 samples. A studied group of 29 habitual snorers presenting chronic retro nasal obstruction due to enlarged adenoid and a control group of 29 age matched children selected among patients consulting for routine evaluation. Patients who had used topical or systemic medication for the nose, as well as those who had undergone adenoidectomy were excluded from the study. Children were submitted to history taking then ENT and orthodontic examination. Linear and angular cephalometric measurements were used for craniofacial features evaluation. Results significant craniofacial anomalies were found in patients presenting chronic retro nasal obstruction: shortened cranial base and mandibular plane length, widened cranio-cervical flexure, forwardness of hyoid bone, reduced nasopharyngeal airway space, widened of oropharyngeal and hypopharyngeal airway space. Conclusion our study suggests that craniofacial modifications due to chronic retro nasal obstruction lead to pharyngeal airway readjustment. Persistent retro nasal obstruction should be corrected early in life in order to avoid skeletal modifications appearance.
    International journal of pediatric otorhinolaryngology 04/2014; · 0.85 Impact Factor
  • [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)

Available from
Sep 2, 2014