+ Site Statistics
+ Search Articles
+ PDF Full Text Service
How our service works
Request PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on Facebook
Follow on Twitter
Follow on LinkedIn
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
Most Shared
PDF Full Text
+ Translate
+ Recently Requested

Craniofacial shape differs in patients with tooth agenesis: geometric morphometric analysis



Craniofacial shape differs in patients with tooth agenesis: geometric morphometric analysis



European Journal of Orthodontics 39(4): 345-351



To evaluate the shape of the craniofacial complex in patients with tooth agenesis and compare it to matched controls. The sample comprised 456 patients that were allocated to three groups: the agenesis group of 100 patients with at least one missing tooth, excluding third molars, the third molar agenesis group (3dMAG; one to four missing third molars) of 52 patients and the control group (CG) of 304 patients with no missing teeth. The main craniofacial structures depicted on lateral cephalograms were digitized and traced with 15 curves and 127 landmarks. These landmarks were subjected to Procrustes superimposition and principal component analysis in order to describe shape variability of the cranial base, maxilla and mandible, as well as of the whole craniofacial complex. For statistical analysis, permutation tests were used (10 000 permutations without replacement). Approximately half of the sample's variability was described by the first three principal components. Comparisons within the whole sample revealed sexual dimorphism of the craniofacial complex and its structures (P < 0.01). Differences between the agenesis group and matched controls were found in the shape of all craniofacial structures except for the cranial base (P < 0.05). Specifically, patients with agenesis presented with Class III tendency and hypodivergent skeletal pattern. However, the comparison between the 3dMAG and matched CG revealed no differences. The shape of the craniofacial complex differs in patients with tooth agenesis suggesting that common factors are implicated in tooth development and craniofacial morphology.

Please choose payment method:






(PDF emailed within 0-6 h: $19.90)

Accession: 057532289

Download citation: RISBibTeXText

PMID: 27464525

DOI: 10.1093/ejo/cjw049


Related references

3D laser surface scanning and geometric morphometric analysis of craniofacial shape as an index of cerebro-craniofacial morphogenesis: Initial application to sexual dimorphism. Biological Psychiatry 51(6): 507-514, 2002

Maternal environment and craniofacial growth: geometric morphometric analysis of mandibular shape changes with in utero thyroxine overexposure in mice. Journal of Anatomy 233(1): 46-54, 2018

Geometric morphometric analysis of shark teeth of the genus Rhizoprionodon modern tooth shape analysis and test of ancestral prediction methods by comparison to fossil shapes. Abstracts with Programs - Geological Society of America 36(5): 315, 2004

Geometric morphometric analysis of craniofacial growth between the ages of 12 and 14 in normal humans. European Journal of Orthodontics 39(4): 386-394, 2017

Sexual dimorphism in America: geometric morphometric analysis of the craniofacial region. Journal of Forensic Sciences 53(1): 54-57, 2008

Analysis of sexual dimorphism of craniofacial traits using geometric morphometric techniques. International Journal of Osteoarchaeology 21(1): 82-91, 2011

Geometric morphometric shape quantification using elliptical Fourier analysis; an example from human frontal sinus shape and potential use in comparing palaeontological remains. Abstracts - Geological Society of Australia 85: 52, 2007

Are you what you eat? A geometric morphometric analysis of gekkotan skull shape. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 97(3): 677-707, 2009

Salinity and Egg Shape Variation A Geometric Morphometric Analysis. Journal of Herpetology 47(1): 15-23, 2013

Geometric morphometric analysis of xenarthran femoral shape. Record - Geological Survey of Western Australia: 58, 2011

Geometric morphometric analysis of mandibular shape diversity in Pan. Journal of Human Evolution 63(1): 191-204, 2012

Geometric morphometric analysis of craniofacial variation, ontogeny and modularity in a cross-sectional sample of modern humans. Journal of Anatomy 222(4): 397-409, 2013

The shape of the hominoid proximal femur: a geometric morphometric analysis. Journal of Anatomy 210(2): 170-185, 2007

A geometric morphometric analysis of hominin upper first molar shape. Journal of Human Evolution 53(3): 272-285, 2007

The shape and presentation of the Catarrhine talus: a geometric morphometric analysis. Anatomical Record 296(6): 877-890, 2013