» Articles » PMID: 38003884

Skull Biomechanics and Simplified Cephalometric Lines for the Estimation of Muscular Lines of Action

Overview
Journal J Pers Med
Date 2023 Nov 25
PMID 38003884
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Our study introduces a novel cephalometric analysis aimed at facilitating biomechanical simulations by elucidating the intricate relationship between craniofacial morphology and the size and inclination of the masseter muscle (MM) while incorporating muscle values. Our study analyzes the line of action of the MM drawn between the Gonion (Go) and Orbital (Or) points concerning dental and skeletal references (occlusal and Frankfort planes). A total of 510 pre-treatment lateral cephalometric tracings (217 males, 293 females, aged 6-50 years) and lateral Bolton standard tracings were examined. The key parameters investigated include (a) skeletal-cutaneous class (linear distance between projections of points A' and B' on the occlusal plane), (b) the angle between the perpendicular line to the occlusal plane and the Go-Or line at the molar occlusal point, and (c) the angle between the Go-Or line and the Frankfort plane. The assessment of anterior-posterior jaw discrepancy, measured as the skeletal-cutaneous class, ranged from -14.5 to 15.5 mm. Abnormal values were identified in two adolescents, showing no gender- or age-related patterns. The angle between the MM's line of action (Go-Or) and the normal to the occlusal plane averaged 39.3°, while the angle between Go-Or and Po-Or (Frankfort plane) averaged 41.99°. Age had an impact on these angles, with an average 3° decrease in adults and a 4° increase between ages 6 and 50. A weak relationship was observed between sagittal jaw discrepancy and the angle between Go-Or and the Frankfort plane, with about 20% of the variance explained by the anteroposterior maxillary-mandibular relationship. In conclusion, the study presents a cephalometric analysis of the relationship between craniofacial morphology and masseter muscle parameters. It finds that age influences the angles between key reference points, while the skeletal-cutaneous class does not exhibit age- or gender-specific trends. These findings can contribute to a better understanding of craniofacial biomechanics and aid in clinical orthodontic assessments and treatment planning.

Citing Articles

Evaluation of Incisor Position in a Sample of Orthodontic Patients.

Rongo R, Importuna M, Pango Madariaga A, Bucci R, DAnto V, Valletta R Diagnostics (Basel). 2024; 14(18).

PMID: 39335741 PMC: 11431616. DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics14182062.


COVID-19 on Oral Health: A New Bilateral Connection for the Pandemic.

Bellocchio L, Dipalma G, Inchingolo A, Inchingolo A, Ferrante L, Del Vecchio G Biomedicines. 2024; 12(1).

PMID: 38255167 PMC: 10813615. DOI: 10.3390/biomedicines12010060.

References
1.
Kasai K, Richards L, Kanazawa E, Ozaki T, Iwasawa T . Relationship between attachment of the superficial masseter muscle and craniofacial morphology in dentate and edentulous humans. J Dent Res. 1994; 73(6):1142-9. DOI: 10.1177/00220345940730060301. View

2.
Ferrario V, Sforza C, Serrao G, Colombo A, Ciusa V, Bignotto M . Reliability of soft tissue references for anteroposterior measurement of dental bases. Int J Adult Orthodon Orthognath Surg. 1998; 13(3):210-6. View

3.
Throckmorton G, Throckmorton L . Quantitative calculations of temporomandibular joint reaction forces--I. The importance of the magnitude of the jaw muscle forces. J Biomech. 1985; 18(6):445-52. DOI: 10.1016/0021-9290(85)90279-9. View

4.
Dellavia C, Francetti L, Rosati R, Corbella S, Ferrario V, Sforza C . Electromyographic assessment of jaw muscles in patients with All-on-Four fixed implant-supported prostheses. J Oral Rehabil. 2012; 39(12):896-904. DOI: 10.1111/joor.12002. View

5.
Ferrario V, Sforza C, Germano D, Dalloca L, Miani Jr A . Head posture and cephalometric analyses: an integrated photographic/radiographic technique. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1994; 106(3):257-64. DOI: 10.1016/S0889-5406(94)70045-1. View