Cephalometric Norms Among Qatari Females



Read Counter
526

Downloads
397

Citations

Share

Article Sidebar

Submitted 2020-06-09
Published 2020-06-28
10.24018/ejmed.2020.2.3.335

Read counter = 526 times

Table of Contents

Article Main Content

Aims: The aims of this study were to introduce cephalometric norms for Qatari females and compare the result with previous published reports.

Material and method: The sample consisted of 57 cephalographs with age range 18 to 25 years old. All subjects satisfied the criteria of selection. Cephalometric measurements of Qatari females were then compared with Eastman Standard norms and Arabs studies as well as reports conducted among Oriental and Black races.

Results: The result indicates that Qatari females presented with higher mean values of sagittal and vertical relationship compared to Caucasian cephalometric norms. In terms of dental variables proclined upper and lower incisors in relation to their dental bases, and a reduction in inter-incisal angle. The soft tissue variables indicate that the lips were slightly protrusive in relation to Rickett’s esthetic line, and the nasolabial angle was less obtuse. The bimaxillary proclination and protrusion of the upper and lower incisors were existed in all Arab populations as well as in Black and Oriental races whereas the Caucasian had retrusive dentition.

Conclusion: Due to limitation of the present study, it is difficult to draw a solid conclusion due to small sample size.  Hence, large sample size is recommended for both sexes in order to establish cephalometric norms which will be of great help not only to the orthodontist but also to the oral and maxillofacial surgeon as well as the pedodontist.

Keywords: Cephalometric Norms, Caucasian, Orthodontic treatment, racial groups

References

  1. Broadbent, B. A new x-ray technique and its application to orthodontia." Angle Orthod.. 51(2): 93-114. 1931
     Google Scholar
  2. Hofrath H. Bedeutung der röntgenfern und abstands aufnahme für die diagnostik der kieferanomalien. Fortschritte der Orthodontie 1 :231. 1931
    DOI  |   Google Scholar
  3. Downs, W. B. Variations In Facial Relationship: Their Significance In Treatment and Prognosis1. Angle Orthod.19(3): 145-55. 1949.
     Google Scholar
  4. Steiner, C. C. Cephalometrics for you and me." Am J Orthod. 39(10): 729-55. 1953.
    DOI  |   Google Scholar
  5. Tweed, C. H.. The Frankfort-Mandibular Incisor Angle (FMIA) In Orthodontic Diagnosis, Treatment Planning and Prognosis." Angle Orthod. 24(3): 121-69. 1954.
     Google Scholar
  6. Mills, J. R. E. Principles and Practice of Orthodontics.Churchill Livingstone, Edinburgh. 1982
     Google Scholar
  7. Sassouni, V. "A roentgenographic cephalometric analysis of cephalo-facio-dental relationships. Am J Orthod. 41(10): 735-64.1955.
    DOI  |   Google Scholar
  8. Ricketts, R. M. Cephalometric Analysis And Synthesis." Angle Orthod. 67(2): 125-38. 1961.
     Google Scholar
  9. Jacobson, A. The Wits appraisal of jaw disharmony. Am J Orthod.. 67(2): 125-38. 1975.
    DOI  |   Google Scholar
  10. McNamara, J. A., Jr. A method of cephalometric evaluation." Am J Orthod. 86(6): 449-69. 1984.
    DOI  |   Google Scholar
  11. Kavitha L and Karthik K. Comparison of cephalometric norms of caucasians and non-caucasians: A forensic aid in ethnic determination. J Forensic Dent Sci. Jan-Jun; 4(1): 53–55. 2012.
     Google Scholar
  12. Hideki Ioi, Shunsuke Nakata, Akihiko Nakasima, Amy L CountsComparison of cephalometric norms between Japanese and Caucasian adults in antero-posterior and vertical dimension. Eur J Orthodont;29:493-99. 2007.
    DOI  |   Google Scholar
  13. John Wu, Urban Hägg, Bakr A, Rabie M. Chinese norms of McNamara's cephalometric analysis. Angle Orthodont;77(1):12-20. 2007.
    DOI  |   Google Scholar
  14. Jagan Nath Sharma .Steiner's cephalometric norms for the Nepalese population. J Orthodont. 38:21-31. 2011.
    DOI  |   Google Scholar
  15. Guilherme Janson, Camila Leite Quaglio, Arnaldo pinzan, Eduardo Jacomino Franco, Marcos Roberto de Freitas. Craniofacial characteristics of Caucasian and Afro-Caucasian Brazilian subjects with normal occlusion. J Appl Oral Sci ;19(2):118-24. 2011.
    DOI  |   Google Scholar
  16. Emmanuel Olubusayo Ajayi. Cephalometric Norms of Nigerian Children. Am J Orthod Dentofac.Orthop. Nov;128(5):653-65. 2005.
    DOI  |   Google Scholar
  17. Hamdan A. M. Rock W. P. Cephalometric Norms in an Arabic Population. British Orthodontic Society..Vol 28 No. 297-300. 2001.
    DOI  |   Google Scholar
  18. Kenza Lahlou, Asmae Bahoum, Myriam Boukili Makhoukhi, El Houssaine Aalloula. Comparison of dentolveolar protrusion values in Moroccans and other populations. Eur J Orthodont;32:430-34. 2010.
    DOI  |   Google Scholar
  19. Bishara, S. E., E. M. Abdalla and B. J. Hoppens. Cephalometric comparisons of dentofacial parameters between Egyptian and North American adolescents. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 97(5): 413-21. 1990.
    DOI  |   Google Scholar
  20. Hashim, H. A. and S. F. AlBarakati. Cephalometric soft tissue profile analysis between two different ethnic groups: a comparative study. J Contemp Dent Pract. 4(2): 60-73. 2003.
    DOI  |   Google Scholar
  21. Hassan, A. H. Cephalometric characteristics of Class II division 1 malocclusion in a Saudi population living in the western region. Saudi Dent J. 23(1): 23-27. 2011.
    DOI  |   Google Scholar
  22. Al Zain, T. and D. J. Ferguson "Cephalometric characterization of an adult Emirati sample with Class I malocclusion." J Orthod Sci. 1(1): 11-15. 2012.
    DOI  |   Google Scholar
  23. AlBarakati SF, Kula KS, and Ghoneima AA.The reliability and reproducibility of cephalometric measurements: a comparison of conventional and digital methods. Dentomaxillofacial Radiology 41, 11–17. 2012.
    DOI  |   Google Scholar
  24. Huda M. Abu-Tayyem, Amna H. Alshamsi, Sayed Hafez, Eman Mohie EL-Din. Cephalometric norms for a sample of Emirates adults. Open Journal of Stomatology. 1, 75-83, 2011.
    DOI  |   Google Scholar
  25. Prashantha S. Govinakovi, Ibrahim Al-Busaidi, Viswapurna Senguttuvan. Cephalometric Norms in an Omani Adult Population of Arab Descent. Clinical & basic research. May Vol. 18, Iss. 2, pp. 182–189. 2018.
    DOI  |   Google Scholar
  26. Nasser M. AL-Jasser. Cephalometric Evaluation for Saudi Population Using the Downs and Steiner Analysis. J Contemp Dent Pract May;(6) 2:52-63.2005.
    DOI  |   Google Scholar
  27. Marlon Alvaro Moldez. Koshi Sato Junji Sugawara Hideo Mitani. Linear and Angular Filipino Cephalometric Norms According to Age and Sex. Angle Orthod 76 (5): 800–05. 2006.
     Google Scholar
  28. Lívia Maria Andrade de Freitas, Karina Maria Salvatore de Freitas, Arnaldo Pinzan,Guilherme Janson, Marcos Roberto de Freitas. A comparison of skeletal, dentoalveolar and soft tissue characteristics in white and black Brazilian subjects. J Appl Oral Sci.;18(2):135-42. 2010.
    DOI  |   Google Scholar
  29. Taibah SM, Feteih RM. Cephalometric features of anterior open bite. World. J Orthod. 8:145‑52. 2007.
     Google Scholar
  30. Ousehal L, Jouhadi E, Bennani A. Vertical dimension of occlusion (VDO):Cephalometric norms for a Moroccan population. J Orofac Orthop. 77:39‑44. 2016.
    DOI  |   Google Scholar
  31. Lateral Cephalometric Norms for Adolescent Kuwaitis: Hard Tissue Measurements Badreia Al-Jame, Jon Artun, Rashed Al-Azemi, Faraj Behbehani, Sana Buhamra. Med Princ Pract.15(2):91-97. 2006.
    DOI  |   Google Scholar
  32. Deema Ali Alshammery, Sarah Almubarak, Alhanouf Bin Hezaim, Razan Alkhunein, Sharat Chandra Pani, Hezekiah Mossadomi. Cephalometric norms of skeletal relationship among populations in selected Arab countries. A systematic review and meta‑analysis. S J Oral Sci. Vol 3 No 269-74. 2016.
    DOI  |   Google Scholar