The Angle orthodontist · 2013
Characteristics of Down syndrome subjects in a Saudi sample.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Korayem Mohammed A, AlKofide Eman A
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To compare the cephalometric characteristics of Down syndrome (DS) subjects with those of normal subjects.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Cephalometric radiographs of 60 Saudi DS subjects and 60 controls with specific inclusion criteria were used. Descriptive statistics were used to describe the quantitative and categorical variables, and the Student's t-test for two independent samples was used to compare the mean values of quantitative variables.
RESULTS: SBa and SN were higher in controls than in DS subjects, whereas the NSBa was significantly higher in DS subjects than in controls. SNA, Co-A, ANB, and A-Na perp of controls were higher than the DS subjects. However, SN-MP, PP-MP, ANS-Me/N-Me, Y-axis, and Ar-Go-Me of the DS subjects were higher than those of the controls. In addition, U1-NA, U1-NA mm, L1-NB, and L1-NB mm of the DS subjects were also higher than the controls with a more acute U1-L1 angle in DS. NLA was larger in controls than in DS, whereas LL-E and UL-E of the DS subjects were higher than the controls.
CONCLUSIONS: Differences between DS subjects and controls can be found when examining cephalometric radiographs. Anterior and posterior cranial base lengths are shorter with a backward inclination of the posterior cranial base in DS subjects. DS subjects present with a retrognathic maxilla and shorter effective length, with an increased LFH and a hyperdivergent mandible. Bimaxillary dental protrusion can also be expected in DS subjects with prominent lips and a reduced nasolabial angle.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Cephalometric radiographs of 60 Saudi DS subjects and 60 controls with specific inclusion criteria were used. Descriptive statistics were used to describe the quantitative and categorical variables, and the Student's t-test for two independent samples was used to compare the mean values of quantitative variables.
RESULTS: SBa and SN were higher in controls than in DS subjects, whereas the NSBa was significantly higher in DS subjects than in controls. SNA, Co-A, ANB, and A-Na perp of controls were higher than the DS subjects. However, SN-MP, PP-MP, ANS-Me/N-Me, Y-axis, and Ar-Go-Me of the DS subjects were higher than those of the controls. In addition, U1-NA, U1-NA mm, L1-NB, and L1-NB mm of the DS subjects were also higher than the controls with a more acute U1-L1 angle in DS. NLA was larger in controls than in DS, whereas LL-E and UL-E of the DS subjects were higher than the controls.
CONCLUSIONS: Differences between DS subjects and controls can be found when examining cephalometric radiographs. Anterior and posterior cranial base lengths are shorter with a backward inclination of the posterior cranial base in DS subjects. DS subjects present with a retrognathic maxilla and shorter effective length, with an increased LFH and a hyperdivergent mandible. Bimaxillary dental protrusion can also be expected in DS subjects with prominent lips and a reduced nasolabial angle.