SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Journal of Health Sciences and Medicine / 2026 / Volume: 9 Issue: 5

Association between anterior open bite and frontal sinus, maxillary sinus, and nasal width: a cephalometric study

Anıl Demirel(İNÖNÜ ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0009-0007-1708-0712
Fırat Oğuz(İnönü Üniversitesi Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi)0000-0001-6040-3790
Handan Göze Oğuz(Private practice)0000-0002-1101-7540
Pages
—
Publication Date
2026-09-19
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Only the Frontal Sinus Index demonstrated a significant overall intergroup difference (p=0.039); however, post-hoc pairwise comparisons did not reveal significant differences between any groups.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Aims: The aim of this study was to compare frontal sinus dimensions, maxillary sinus dimensions, and nasal width measurements between skeletal class I and class II patients with anterior open bite and a control group using lateral cephalometric and posteroanterior radiographs.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Methods: This retrospective study included 110 individuals divided into three groups: skeletal class I anterior open bite (n=40), skeletal class II anterior open bite (n=40), and skeletal class I control group with normal overbite (n=30).
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Only the Frontal Sinus Index demonstrated a significant overall intergroup difference (p=0.039); however, post-hoc pairwise comparisons did not reveal significant differences between any groups.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Anterior open bite · cephalometric analysis · frontal sinus

Abstract

Aims: The aim of this study was to compare frontal sinus dimensions, maxillary sinus dimensions, and nasal width measurements between skeletal class I and class II patients with anterior open bite and a control group using lateral cephalometric and posteroanterior radiographs. Methods: This retrospective study included 110 individuals divided into three groups: skeletal class I anterior open bite (n=40), skeletal class II anterior open bite (n=40), and skeletal class I control group with normal overbite (n=30). Frontal sinus height and width, maxillary sinus height and width, sinus indices, and nasal width measurements were obtained from lateral cephalometric and posteroanterior radiographs using WebCeph software. Intergroup comparisons and correlation analyses between sinus/nasal measurements and cephalometric variables were performed. Results: Significant intergroup differences were observed for several cephalometric parameters, including SNB, ANB, Wits appraisal, FMA, SN-GoMe, IMPA, and L1-NB (p 0.05). Only the Frontal Sinus Index demonstrated a significant overall intergroup difference (p=0.039); however, post-hoc pairwise comparisons did not reveal significant differences between any groups. Frontal sinus width was significantly greater in males, whereas Frontal Sinus Index values were significantly higher in females (p<0.05). Positive correlations were identified between age and maxillary sinus dimensions as well as nasal width. Conclusion: Patients with anterior open bite showed no significant differences in frontal sinus dimensions, maxillary sinus dimensions, or nasal width compared with the control group. Although weak associations were observed between certain cephalometric parameters and sinus/nasal measurements, age and gender were also associated with specific anatomical dimensions.

🔖

Cite This Article

Demirel, A., Oğuz, F., Oğuz, H. G. (2026). Association between anterior open bite and frontal sinus, maxillary sinus, and nasal width: a cephalometric study. Journal of Health Sciences and Medicine, Volume: 9 Issue: 5. https://doi.org/10.32322/jhsm.1966570

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (30)

  1. Subtelny JD, Sakuda M. Open-bite: diagnosis and treatment. Am J Orthod. 1964;50(5):337-358. doi:10.1016/0002-9416(64)90175-7
  2. Beane RA, Reimann G, Phillips C, Tulloch C. A cephalometric comparison of black open-bite subjects and black normals. Angle Orthod. 2003;73(3):294-300. doi:10.1043/0003-3219(2003)073 2.0.CO;2
  3. Ngan P, Fields HW. Open bite: a review of etiology and management. Pediatr Dent. 1997;19(2):91-98.
  4. Curto A, Albaladejo A, Alvarado-Lorenzo A. Oral-health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) and anterior open bite in adult patients: a case-control study. Healthcare (Basel). 2022;10(1):129. doi:10.3390/healthcare10010129
  5. Keyser MMB, Lathrop H, Jhingree S, et al. Impacts of skeletal anterior open bite malocclusion on speech. FACE (Thousand Oaks). 2022;3(2):339-349. doi:10.1177/27325016221082229
  6. Daer AA, Abuaffan AH. Skeletal and dentoalveolar cephalometric features of anterior open bite among Yemeni adults. Scientifica (Cairo). 2016;2016:3147972. doi:10.1155/2016/3147972
  7. Umeh OD, Chegwe S, Utomi IL. An evaluation of cephalometric predictors of anterior open bite: an assessment of dental and skeletal parameters in an orthodontic population. J Orthod Sci. 2024;13:10. doi:10.4103/jos.jos_56_23
  8. Ahmed HZ, Qamruddin I, Siddiqui H, et al. Morphology of maxillary and frontal sinuses in different skeletal vertical malocclusions. J Orthod Sci. 2025;14:5. doi:10.4103/jos.jos_215_23
  9. Metin-Gürsoy G, Akay G, Baloş Tuncer B. Frontal sinus: is it a predictor for vertical malocclusions? Anat Sci Int. 2021;96(1):62-69. doi:10.1007/s12565-020-00557-9
  10. Dhiman I, Singla A, Mahajan V, Jaj HS, Seth V, Negi P. Reliability of frontal sinus with that of maxillary sinus in assessment of different types of skeletal malocclusions. J Indian Orthod Soc. 2015;49(2):96-103. doi:10.4103/0301-5742.162265
  11. Emirzeoglu M, Sahin B, Bilgic S, Celebi M, Uzun A. Volumetric evaluation of the paranasal sinuses in normal subjects using computer tomography images: a stereological study. Auris Nasus Larynx. 2007;34(2):191-195. doi:10.1016/j.anl.2006.09.003
  12. Buyuk SK, Karaman A, Yasa Y. Association between frontal sinus morphology and craniofacial parameters: a forensic view. J Forensic Leg Med. 2017;49:20-23. doi:10.1016/j.jflm.2017.05.007
  13. Okşayan R, Sökücü O, Yeşildal S. Evaluation of maxillary sinus volume and dimensions in different vertical face growth patterns: a study of cone-beam computed tomography. Acta Odontol Scand. 2017;75(5):345-349. doi:10.1080/00016357.2017.1310294
  14. Sivasankari RSS, Khan N, Parameswaran R, Boovaraghavan S, Nagi M. Evaluation of dimensional changes in maxillary and frontal sinus in adult patients with anterior open bite and normal overbite: a retrospective cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) study. Cureus. 2024;16(2):e53710. doi:10.7759/cureus.53710
  15. Said OT, Rossouw PE, Fishman LS, Feng C. Relationship between anterior occlusion and frontal sinus size. Angle Orthod. 2017;87(5):752-758. doi:10.2319/010617-18.1
  16. Endo T, Abe R, Kuroki H, Kojima K, Oka K, Shimooka S. Cephalometric evaluation of maxillary sinus sizes in different malocclusion classes. Odontology. 2010;98(1):65-72. doi:10.1007/s10266-009-0108-5
  17. Çolak S, Keldal MK, Keldal G, Başal A, Bıçakçı AA. Early skeletal, nasal, and soft tissue changes after surgically assisted rapid maxillary expansion: a retrospective cephalometric study. BMC Oral Health. 2026;26(1):801. doi:10.1186/s12903-026-08215-8
  18. Bujang MA, Baharum N. A simplified guide to determination of sample size requirements for estimating the value of intraclass correlation coefficient: a review. Arch Orofac Sci. 2017;12(1):1-11.
  19. Enlow DH, Hans MG. Essentials of Facial Growth. WB Saunders Co; 1996.
  20. Dah-Jouonzo H, Baron P, Faure J. Correlations between the volume of the sinuses and the facial bones and parameters of 3-dimensional cephalometry. Orthod Fr. 2007;78(4):265-281. doi:10.1051/orthodfr: 2007030
  21. Rossouw PE, Lombard CJ, Harris AMP. The frontal sinus and mandibular growth prediction. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1991; 100(6):542-546. doi:10.1016/0889-5406(91)70095-E
  22. Alfawzan AA. Assessment of skeletal maturity in a sample of the Saudi population using cervical vertebrae and Frontal Sinus Index: a cephalometric study using Artificial Intelligence. Cureus. 2023;15(7). doi:10.7759/cureus.41811
  23. Zheng B, Zhong Y, Al-Worafi NA, Liu Y. The dimensional and morphological assessment of the frontal sinus in sex estimation among different populations. Head Face Med. 2023;19(1):8. doi:10.1186/s13005-023-00355-4
  24. Yassaei S, Emami A, Mirbeigi S. Cephalometric association of mandibular size/length to the surface area and dimensions of the frontal and maxillary sinuses. Eur J Dent. 2018;12(2):253-261. doi:10.4103/ejd.ejd_345_17
  25. Oliveira MBCR, Marañón-Vásquez GA, Madalena IR, et al. Analysis of frontal sinus dimensions according to the skeletal malocclusion in German teenagers. Braz Dent J. 2024;35. doi:10.1590/0103-644020245964
  26. Oktay H. The study of the maxillary sinus areas in different orthodontic malocclusions. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1992;102(2):143-145. doi:10.1016/0889-5406(92)70026-7
  27. Barghouth G, Prior JO, Lepori D, Duvoisin B, Schnyder P, Gudinchet F. Paranasal sinuses in children: size evaluation of maxillary, sphenoid, and frontal sinuses by magnetic resonance imaging and Proposal of Volume Index percentile curves. Eur Radiol. 2002;12(6):1451-1458. doi: 10.1007/s00330-001-1218-9
  28. Sánchez Fernández JM, Anta Escuredo JA, Sánchez Del Rey A, Santaolalla Montoya F. Morphometric study of the paranasal sinuses in normal and pathological conditions. Acta Otolaryngol. 2000;120(2):273-278. doi:10.1080/000164800750001080
  29. Jun BC, Song SW, Park CS, Lee DH, Cho KJ, Cho JH. The analysis of maxillary sinus aeration according to aging process: volume assessment by 3-dimensional reconstruction by high-resolutional CT scanning. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2005;132(3):429-434. doi:10.1016/j.otohns. 2004.11.012
  30. Ryu J, Choi SH, Cha JY, Lee KJ, Hwang CJ. Retrospective study of maxillary sinus dimensions and pneumatization in adult patients with an anterior open bite. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2016;150(5):796-801. doi:10.1016/j.ajodo.2016.03.032