Relationship between Cervical Spine and Skeletal Class II in Subjects with and without Temporomandibular Disorders

Aim. To assess changes in the craniocervical structure and in hyoid bone position in skeletal Class II subjects with and without temporomandibular disorders (TMD). Materials and Methods. The cephalometric analysis of 59 subjects with skeletal Class II was evaluated and compared. The measurements con...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Paola Di Giacomo, Valeria Ferrara, Ettore Accivile, Giacomo Ferrato, Antonella Polimeni, Carlo Di Paolo
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Wiley 2018-01-01
Series:Pain Research and Management
Online Access:http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2018/4286796
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1850106393063849984
author Paola Di Giacomo
Valeria Ferrara
Ettore Accivile
Giacomo Ferrato
Antonella Polimeni
Carlo Di Paolo
author_facet Paola Di Giacomo
Valeria Ferrara
Ettore Accivile
Giacomo Ferrato
Antonella Polimeni
Carlo Di Paolo
author_sort Paola Di Giacomo
collection DOAJ
description Aim. To assess changes in the craniocervical structure and in hyoid bone position in skeletal Class II subjects with and without temporomandibular disorders (TMD). Materials and Methods. The cephalometric analysis of 59 subjects with skeletal Class II was evaluated and compared. The measurements considered were ANB as a parameter of Class II and C0-C1 distance, C1-C2 distance, craniocervical angle, and hyoid bone position for the cervical spine analysis. Patients were divided into patients with TMD (group A) and patients without TMD (group B). TMD were evaluated with Diagnostic Criteria for TMD (DC/TMD). Descriptive statistics and Pearson’s and Spearman’s correlation analysis, with p value <0,005, were performed. Results. C0-C1 and C1-C2 distance values and hyoid bone position resulted within the normal range in the majority of patients examined. Craniocervical angle was altered in 33 patients. The reduction of this angle with the increase of the ANB value resulted to be statistically significant in group A, according to Pearson’s correlation index. No other data were statistically significant. Conclusions. The significant relationship between skeletal Class II and cervical spine cannot be highlighted. The alteration of craniocervical angle seems to be mildly present, with backward counterclockwise rotation of the head upon the neck in the sample (groups A and B). The presence of TMD as a key factor of changes in neck posture could explain the different result between the two groups about the relationship between ANB and craniocervical angle. This result should be further analyzed in order to better understand if cervical spine changes could be related to mandibular postural ones in the craniocervical space or to temporomandibular joint retropositioning, more recognizable in Class II with TMD, which could determine functional changes in other structures of this unit; neck posture could be the result of a compensatory/antalgic mechanism in response to TMD.
format Article
id doaj-art-2ea3892a66f4439e8a74141da299d1ca
institution OA Journals
issn 1203-6765
1918-1523
language English
publishDate 2018-01-01
publisher Wiley
record_format Article
series Pain Research and Management
spelling doaj-art-2ea3892a66f4439e8a74141da299d1ca2025-08-20T02:38:50ZengWileyPain Research and Management1203-67651918-15232018-01-01201810.1155/2018/42867964286796Relationship between Cervical Spine and Skeletal Class II in Subjects with and without Temporomandibular DisordersPaola Di Giacomo0Valeria Ferrara1Ettore Accivile2Giacomo Ferrato3Antonella Polimeni4Carlo Di Paolo5Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, ItalyDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, ItalyDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, ItalyDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, ItalyDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, ItalyDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, ItalyAim. To assess changes in the craniocervical structure and in hyoid bone position in skeletal Class II subjects with and without temporomandibular disorders (TMD). Materials and Methods. The cephalometric analysis of 59 subjects with skeletal Class II was evaluated and compared. The measurements considered were ANB as a parameter of Class II and C0-C1 distance, C1-C2 distance, craniocervical angle, and hyoid bone position for the cervical spine analysis. Patients were divided into patients with TMD (group A) and patients without TMD (group B). TMD were evaluated with Diagnostic Criteria for TMD (DC/TMD). Descriptive statistics and Pearson’s and Spearman’s correlation analysis, with p value <0,005, were performed. Results. C0-C1 and C1-C2 distance values and hyoid bone position resulted within the normal range in the majority of patients examined. Craniocervical angle was altered in 33 patients. The reduction of this angle with the increase of the ANB value resulted to be statistically significant in group A, according to Pearson’s correlation index. No other data were statistically significant. Conclusions. The significant relationship between skeletal Class II and cervical spine cannot be highlighted. The alteration of craniocervical angle seems to be mildly present, with backward counterclockwise rotation of the head upon the neck in the sample (groups A and B). The presence of TMD as a key factor of changes in neck posture could explain the different result between the two groups about the relationship between ANB and craniocervical angle. This result should be further analyzed in order to better understand if cervical spine changes could be related to mandibular postural ones in the craniocervical space or to temporomandibular joint retropositioning, more recognizable in Class II with TMD, which could determine functional changes in other structures of this unit; neck posture could be the result of a compensatory/antalgic mechanism in response to TMD.http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2018/4286796
spellingShingle Paola Di Giacomo
Valeria Ferrara
Ettore Accivile
Giacomo Ferrato
Antonella Polimeni
Carlo Di Paolo
Relationship between Cervical Spine and Skeletal Class II in Subjects with and without Temporomandibular Disorders
Pain Research and Management
title Relationship between Cervical Spine and Skeletal Class II in Subjects with and without Temporomandibular Disorders
title_full Relationship between Cervical Spine and Skeletal Class II in Subjects with and without Temporomandibular Disorders
title_fullStr Relationship between Cervical Spine and Skeletal Class II in Subjects with and without Temporomandibular Disorders
title_full_unstemmed Relationship between Cervical Spine and Skeletal Class II in Subjects with and without Temporomandibular Disorders
title_short Relationship between Cervical Spine and Skeletal Class II in Subjects with and without Temporomandibular Disorders
title_sort relationship between cervical spine and skeletal class ii in subjects with and without temporomandibular disorders
url http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2018/4286796
work_keys_str_mv AT paoladigiacomo relationshipbetweencervicalspineandskeletalclassiiinsubjectswithandwithouttemporomandibulardisorders
AT valeriaferrara relationshipbetweencervicalspineandskeletalclassiiinsubjectswithandwithouttemporomandibulardisorders
AT ettoreaccivile relationshipbetweencervicalspineandskeletalclassiiinsubjectswithandwithouttemporomandibulardisorders
AT giacomoferrato relationshipbetweencervicalspineandskeletalclassiiinsubjectswithandwithouttemporomandibulardisorders
AT antonellapolimeni relationshipbetweencervicalspineandskeletalclassiiinsubjectswithandwithouttemporomandibulardisorders
AT carlodipaolo relationshipbetweencervicalspineandskeletalclassiiinsubjectswithandwithouttemporomandibulardisorders