medigraphic.com
ISSN 0001-0944 (Print)
Órgano Oficial de la Asociación Dental Mexicana

2013, Number 6

<< Back Next >>

Rev ADM 2013; 70 (6)

Profilogram of the population of the State of Mexico, considering different age and sex groups

Sánchez GRM, Montiel BNM, Visoso SÁ, Kubodera IT, Jasso RI

Language: Spanish
References: 21
Page: 309-318
PDF size: 329.78 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Aim: To develop a Sakamoto-based profilogram of the population of the State of Mexico, taking into account age and sex. Material and methods: We evaluated 360 lateral cranial X-rays of distinct groups of people divided into five age groups ranging from 6-8 years to 18 years and over. The following equipment was used in the tracing process: gloves, 0.5 mm mechanical pencils, 8” x 10” matte acetate sheets (3 mm GAC International, Inc. cephalometric tracing paper), a millimeter rule, and lightbox. Cephalometric structures were traced by placing 15 cephalometric points, 26 planes and two lines of reference, X and Y, intersecting at point S. To measure each cephalometric plane, we estimated the mean and standard deviation. We then applied the Student’s t-test. Results: Statistically significant differences in measurements were found as follows: in the 6-8 age group, with respect to Y: N, Or, Ptm, Ans, A, Mo, Ii, Is, B, I, Pog, Go, and with respect to X: B, Pog, Or, Me, Mo, Go, and Ar; in the 9-11 age group, with respect to X: Ans, Is, A, Ii, B, Pog, Or, Me, Mo, Go, and Ar and with respect to Y: N and Or. In the 12-14 age group, there were statistically significant differences in most of the measurements, except for Ptm-Y, Ar-Y, Go-Y, and N-X. In the 15-17 age group, there was no difference in N-X, Ar-Y, and Go-Y; among the men and women studied in the 18 and over age group, no differences were found in Ptm-Y, B-Y, Me-Y, and Pog-Y. Conclusions: Craniofacial growth in the State of Mexico population was vertical and greater in men. Significant differences become more notable after the age of 12 in both sexes. The profilogram obtained will serve as a supplementary tool in the diagnosis of malocclusions and, in conjunction with other diagnostic aids, one that will help in the planning patient-specific treatments.


REFERENCES

  1. Graber T. Ortodoncia. Teoría y Práctica. 3a. ed. México, D.F: Interamericana McGraw-Hill; 1974: p. 10.

  2. Ponce M, Hernández Y. Frecuencia y distribución de maloclusión en una población de 0 a 6 años de edad en San Luis Potosí, México. Programa bebé clínica potosina. Revista Latinoamericana de Ortodoncia y Odontopediatría. “Ortodoncia.ws” edición electrónica, junio 2006.

  3. Talley M, Katagiri M, Pérez HE. Casuística de maloclusiones clases I, II y c III según Angle en el Departamento de Ortodoncia de la UNAM. Revista Odontológica Mexicana 2007; 11 (4): 175-180.

  4. Cano C, Rosas C, Gutiérrez N, Velásquez Y, Godoy S, Quiros O et al. Frecuencia de maloclusión en niños de 5 a 9 años en una zona rural del Estado Guárico periodo 2007-2008. Revista Latinoamericana de Ortodoncia y Odontopediatría. “Ortodoncia.ws” edición electrónica, junio 2008.

  5. Interlandi S. Ortodoncia. Bases para la Iniciación. San Paulo, Brasil: Artes Médicas Latinoamericana, 2002: pp. 482-483.

  6. Proffit W. Ortodoncia contemporánea. 3a. ed. Madrid, España: Elsevier Mosby; 2008: p. 100.

  7. Sakamoto T. A study on the developmental changes of dentofacial complex of Japanese with special reference to sella turcica. J Jpn Orthod Soc 1959; 18: 1-17.

  8. Viazis A. Atlas de Ortodoncia. Principios y aplicaciones clínicas. Buenos Aires, Médica Panamericana; 1995: p. 69.

  9. San Esteban J, Quiroz JC, Ortiz F, García S. Estudio piloto: medidas mandibulares en población infantil mexicana de 8 años de edad, residente en la Ciudad de México. Revista Odontológica Mexicana. 2010; 14 (2): 78-84.

  10. Quiroz M. Estándar cefalométrico en población adulta de Toluca, México: Tesis de Licenciatura. Facultad de Odontología UAEM; 2004.

  11. Nanda RS. The rates of growth of several facial components measured from serial cephalometric roetgenograms. A J Orthod 1955; 44: 658-573.

  12. Asai Y. Growth changes of maxillofacial skeleton of Japanese from 12 to 20 years of age. J Jpn Orthod Soc 1973; 32: 61-98.

  13. Ortega G, Ruiz V. Estudio morfológico craneofacial en la población mexicana con dentición mixta tardía. Tesis de Licenciatura. Odontología UAEM, 1999.

  14. Banafshen KB, Nanda RS. Comparison of maxillary and mandibular growth. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2004; 125: 148-159.

  15. Hernández Y. Tendencias cefalométricas en pacientes pediátricos de San Luis Potosí, SLP (1997). Rev ADM.1998; 55 (5): 221-226.

  16. Phelan T, Buschang PH, Behrents RG, Wintergerst AM, Ceen RF et al. Variation in Class II malocclusion: comparison of Mexican mestizos and American whites. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2004; 125 (4): 418-425.

  17. McNamara JA, Ellis E. Cephalometric analysis of untreated adults with ideal facial and occlusal relationships. Int J Adult Orthod Orthognath Surg. 1988; 3: 221-231.

  18. Moldez MA, Sato K, Sugawara J, Mitani H. Linear and angular Filipino cephalometric norms according to age and sex. Angle Orthod. 2006; 76: 800-805.

  19. Obloj B, Fudalej P, Dudkiewicz Z. Cephalometric standards for Polish 10-year-olds with normal occlusion. Angle Orthod. 2008; 78: 262-269.

  20. Wei Stephen HY. Craneofacial varations, sex differences and the nature of prognathism in Chinese subjects. Angle Orthod. 1969; 39 (4): 303-315.

  21. García JC. Cephalometric evaluation of Mexican American using the Downs and Steiner analyses. Am J Orthod. 1975; 63: 408.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com