Cone beam computed tomography evaluation of the relationship between atlantodental interval and skeletal facial morphology in adolescents()

INTRODUCTION: In the pediatric population, computed tomography examination of the upper cervical spine plays an important role in the diagnosis of neurological injuries involving that region. Due to the interconnected nature of the craniofacial structures, a structural change in one is expected to also cause changes in the other structures. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate relationships between atlantodental interval, cervical vertebral morphology, and facial structure in healthy adolescents using cone beam computed tomography. METHODS: Thirty subjects aged 14–20 years (10 males, mean age: 17.2 years; 20 females, mean age: 17.9 years) were included in the study. The anterior, lateral and posterior atlantodental intervals, and vertical and anteroposterior dimensions of the first and second cervical vertebrae were evaluated from cone beam computed tomography images. Facial morphology was evaluated using 7 parameters on lateral cephalometric cone beam computed tomography images and 6 parameters on posteroanterior images. The Mann–Whitney U test and Wilcoxon test were used for statistical analyses. RESULTS: Comparisons between males and females showed that most parameters were larger in males, with significant differences in vertical facial dimensions (anterior lower face height: p = 0.05; anterior upper face height: p = 0.001), (distance between the most internal point of the frontozygomatic suture and midsagittal reference plane; p = 0.01), (the distance between the deepest point of the right alveolar maxillar process and midsagittal reference plane; p = 0.001), and C2 vertebral dimensions. The anterior and lateral atlantodental interval values correlated with maxilla position relative to the mandible angle, and the anterior atlantodental interval correlated with lower anterior facial height (p = 0.05). Dimensional measurements of the C1 and C2 vertebrae were correlated with both anterior facial heights and some posteroanterior parameters. CONCLUSION: Sagittal, vertical, and transverse facial dimensions and positions were strongly associated with C1 and C2 vertebral dimensions, and the maxillomandibular relationship may affect atlantodental interval. Therefore, including craniofacial features in assessment of the atlantodental area and vertebral distances in adolescents may be beneficial.