Avaliação ultra-sonográfica dos músculos mastigatórios e dimensões faciais em crianças com oclusão normal e mordida cruzada posterior unilateral
Ultrasonographic evaluation of masticatory muscles and facial dimensions in children with unilateral posterior crossbite
Paula Midori Castelo; Maria Beatriz Duarte Gavião; Luciano José Pereira; Leonardo Rigoldi Bonjardim
Resumo
Objetivo: avaliar a espessura dos músculos masseter e porção anterior do temporal por meio da ultra-sonografia e as dimensões faciais de crianças com oclusão normal e mordida cruzada posterior unilateral, na dentição decídua e mista inicial.
Métodos: foram selecionadas 49 crianças, de ambos os gêneros, divididas em quatro grupos: decídua–oclusão normal, decídua–mordida cruzada, mista–oclusão normal e mista–mordida cruzada. A espessura muscular foi comparada entre os lados direito e esquerdo (oclusão normal); e normal e cruzado (mordida cruzada) (teste "t" Student), e relacionada às dimensões faciais e variáveis corporais (teste de correlação de Pearson e Spearman). As dimensões faciais foram mensuradas sobre fotografias frontais padronizadas: altura facial anterior (AFA), distância bizigomática (DB) e intergoniana (DI) e razões AFA/DB e AFA/DI.
Resultados: observou-se que o músculo temporal no repouso apresentou espessura maior no lado cruzado no grupo mista-cruzada (p=0,05). O masseter não apresentou diferença significativa entre os lados em todos os grupos. As variáveis peso e altura não apresentaram correlação com a espessura muscular; já DB e DI apresentaram correlação positiva e as razões AFA/DB e AFA/DI, correlação negativa, com a espessura do masseter em todos os grupos, indicando que crianças com faces mais longas possuem menor espessura deste músculo.
Conclusão: na amostra estudada, os exames da espessura dos músculos mastigatórios e das dimensões faciais demonstraram que a influência das características funcionais sobre as estruturas craniofaciais pôde ser observada já em crianças de pouca idade.
Palavras-chave
Abstract
Purpose: to evaluate the masseter and anterior portion of temporal muscles thickness by ultrasonography and the facial dimensions of children with normal occlusion and unilateral posterior crossbite, in primary and early mixed dentition.
Methods: 49 children of both genders were selected, divided into four groups: primary-normal occlusion, primary-crossbite, mixed-normal occlusion and mixed-crossbite. Muscle thickness was compared between right and left sides (normal occlusion), and normal and crossbite sides (crossbite) (Student "t" test), and related to facial dimensions and body variables (Pearson and Spearman correlation tests). Facial dimensions were measured on standardized frontal photographs: anterior facial height (AFH), bizygomatic (BZ) and intergonial (IG) distances and AFH/BZ and AFH/IG ratios.
Results: anterior temporal muscle at rest showed higher thickness on crossbite side in the mixed-crossbite group (p=0.05). Masseter muscle did not show significant difference between sides in all groups. Weight and height variables did not show correlation to muscle thickness. BZ and IG distances showed positive correlation, and AFH/BZ and AFH/IG ratios negative correlation with masseter thickness in all groups, indicating that children with longer faces have smaller masseter thickness.
Conclusion: in the sample studied, the examination of masticatory muscles thickness and facial dimensions showed that the influence of functional characteristics on craniofacial structures could be observed already in young children.
Keywords
References
1. Kiliaridis S, Kalebo P. Masseter muscle thickness measured by ultrasonography and its relation to facial morphology. J Dent Res. 1991; 70(9):1262-5.
2. Close PJ, Stokes MJ, L'Estrange PR, Rowell J. Ultrasonography of masseter muscle size in normal young adults. J Oral Rehabil. 1995; 22(2):129-34.
3. Raadsheer MC, Kiliaridis S, Van Eijden TM, Van Ginkel FC, Prahl-Andersen B. Masseter muscle thickness in growing individuals and its relation to facial morphology. Arch Oral Biol. 1996; 41(4):323-32.
4. Benington PC, Gardener JE, Hunt NP. Masseter muscle volume measured using ultrasonography and its relationship with facial morphology. Eur J Orthod. 1999; 21(6):659-70.
5. Raadsheer MC, van Eijden TM, van Ginkel FC, Prahl-Andersen B. Contribution of jaw muscle size and craniofacial morphology to human bite force magnitude. J Dent Res. 1999; 78(1):31-42.
6. Kiliaridis S, Katsaros C, Raadsheer MC, Mahboubi PH. Bilateral masseter muscle thickness in growing individuals with unilateral crossbite [abstract 2831]. J Dent Res. 2000; 79:497.
7. Bertram S, Brandlmaier I, Rudisch A, Bodner G, Emshoff R. Cross-sectional characteristics of the masseter muscle: an ultrasonographic study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2003; 32(1):64-8.
8. Bakke M, Tuxen A, Vilmann P, Jensen BR, Vilmann A, Toft M. Ultrasound image of human masseter muscle related to bite force, electromyography, facial morphology, and occlusal factors. Scand J Dent Res. 1992; 100(3):164-71.
9. Kiliaridis S, Kjellberg H, Wenneberg B, Engstrom C. The relationship between maximal bite force, bite force endurance, and facial morphology during growth. A cross-sectional study. Acta Odontol Scand. 1993; 51(5):323-31.
10. Silva Filho OG, Ferrari Junior FM, Aiello CA, Zopone N. Correcao da mordida cruzada posterior nas dentaduras decidua e mista. Rev APCD. 2000; 54(2):142-7.
11. Kiliaridis S. Masticatory muscle influence on craniofacial growth. Acta Odontol Scand. 1995; 53(3):196-202.
12. Varrela J, Alanen P. Prevention and early treatment in orthodontics: a perspective. J Dent Res. 1995; 74(8):1436-8.
13. Troelstrup B, Moller E. Electromyography of the temporalis and masseter muscles in children with unilateral cross-bite. Scand J Dent Res. 1970; 78(5):425-30.
14. Ingevall B, Thilander B. Activity of temporal and masseter muscles in children with a lateral forced bite. Angle Orthod. 1975; 45(4):249-58.
15. Alarcon JA, Martin C, Palma JC. Effect of unilateral posterior crossbite on the electromyographic activity of human masticatory muscles. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2000; 118(3):328-34.
16. Gaviao MB, Raymundo VG, Sobrinho LC. Masticatory efficiency in children with primary dentition. Pediatr Dent. 2001; 23(6):499-505.
17. Kutin G, Hawes RR. Posterior cross-bites in the deciduous and mixed dentitions. Am J Orthod. 1969; 56(5):491-504.
18. Sonnesen L, Bakke M, Solow B. Bite force in preorthodontic children with unilateral crossbite. Eur J Orthod. 2001; 23(6):741-9.
19. Rentes AM, Gaviao MB, Amaral JR. Bite force determination in children with primary dentition. J Oral Rehabil. 2002; 29(12):1174-80.
20. Saitoh I, Hayasaki H, Iwase Y, Nakata M. Improvement in jaw motion following treatment of unilateral crossbite in a child with primary dentition: a case report. Cranio. 2002; 20(2):129-34.
21. Foster TD, Hamilton MC. Occlusion in the primary dentition: study of children at 2 and one-half to 3 years of life. Br Dent J. 1969; 126(2):76-9.
22. Bonjardim LR, Gaviao MB, Carmagnani FG, Pereira LJ, Castelo PM. Signs and symptoms of temporomandibular joint dysfunction in children with primary dentition. J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2003; 28(1):53-8.
23. Landgraf ME, Vedovello Filho M, Junqueira JLC, Valdrighi HC, Vedovello SAS. Analise facial, elemento chave do diagnostico ortodontico contemporaneo. Ortod. 2002; 35(2):147-60.
24. Moreira RWF, Gabrielli MFR, Passeri LA, Moraes M. Analise facial e cefalometrica de mulheres com harmonia facial. Ortod. 2002; 35(1):51-7.
25. van der Bilt A. Human oral function: a review. Braz J Oral Sci. 2002; 1(1):3-11.
26. Helkimo E, Carlsson GE, Helkimo M. Bite force and state of dentition. Acta Odontol Scand. 1977; 35(6):297-303.
27. Bueno VLS, Gavião MBD. Força de mordida em crianças com dentição decídua: um estudo piloto. Rev Odontol Unicid. 2001; 13(1):11-7.
28. Emshoff R, Bertram S, Strobl H. Ultrasonographic cross-sectional characteristics of muscles of the head and neck. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 1999; 87(1):93-106.
29. Lopes SLPC, Gavião MBD, Castelo PM, Garcia AR. Análise da espessura dos músculos mastigatórios, por meio de ultra-sonografia, em crianças com dentição mista. Rev Odontol Unicid. 2001; 13(3):175-9.
30. Myers DR, Barenie JT, Bell RA, Williamson EH. Condylar position in children with posterior crossbites. J Pedod. 1980; 4(4):308-12.
31. Ben-Bassat Y, Yaffe A, Brin I, Freeman J, Ehrlich Y. Functional and morphological-occlusal aspects in children with posterior crossbite. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1993; 104(1):58-63.
32. Planas P. Rehabilitacion neuro-oclusal. Barcelona: Salvat; 1979.
33. Moller E. The chewing apparatus. An electromyographic study of the action of the muscles of mastication and its correlation to facial morphology. Acta Physiol Scand. 1966; 69(280):1-229.
34. Ferrario VF, Sforza C, Serrao G, Colombo A, Ciusa V. Soft tissue facial angles in Down's syndrome subjects: a three-dimensional non-invasive study. Eur J Orthod. 2000; 22(3):299-305.
35. Piancino MG, Talpone F, Vallelonga T, Bracco P. Masticatory patterns in children with unilateral posterior crossbite. In: 79th General Session of the IADR, Chiba, Japan, 2001 [abstract 2409].
36. Weijs WA, Hillen B. Relationship between the physiological cross-section of the human jaw muscles and their cross-sectional area on computer tomograms. J Dent Res. 1984; 63(5):736-42.
37. Castelo PM, Gavião MBD, Pereira LJ, Bonjardim LR. Maximal bite force in children with normal occlusion and unilateral posterior crossbite. In: 82nd General Session of the IADR, Honolulu, Hawaii, 2004 [abstract 0846].
38. Tanner JM. Growth at adolescence. 2. ed. Oxford: Blackwell; 1962.
39. Ingervall B, Minder C. Correlation between facial morphology and activity of the masticatory muscles. J Oral Rehabil. 1997; 24(9):690-6.
40. Farkas LG. Anthropometry of the head and face. 2. ed. New York: Raven Press; 1994.
41. García-Morales P, Buschang PH, Throckmorton GS, English JD. Maximum bite force, muscle efficiency and mechanical advantage in children with vertical growth patterns. Eur J Orthod. 2003; 25(3):265-72.
42. Tuxen A, Bakke M, Pinholt EM. Comparative data from young men and women on masseter muscle fibres, function and facial morphology. Arch Oral Biol. 1999; 44(6):509-18.
43. Rowlerson A, Raoul G, Daniel Y, Close J, Maurage CA, Ferri J, et al. Fiber-type differences in masseter muscle associated with different facial morphologies. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2005; 127(1):37-46.
44. Fields HW, Proffit WR, Nixon WL, Phillips C, Stanek E. Facial pattern differences in long-faced children and adults. Am J Orthod. 1984; 85(3):217-23.
45. Kovero O, Hurmerinta K, Zepa I, Huggare J, Nissinen M, Kononen M. Maximal bite force and its associations with spinal posture and craniofacial morphology in young adults. Acta Odontol Scand. 2002; 60(6):365-9.
46. Sassouni V. A classification of skeletal facial types. Am J Orthod. 1969; 55(2):109-23.
47. Kiliaridis S, Georgiakaki I, Katsaros C. Masseter muscle thickness and maxillary dental arch width. Eur J Orthod. 2003; 25(3):259-63.
Submitted date:
04/19/2006
Accepted date:
11/05/2006
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Mendeley
Email