Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2025 May 15;29(6):299.
doi: 10.1007/s00784-025-06367-5.

Three-dimensional pharyngeal airway and hyoid bone changes in skeletal class I malocclusion treated with extraction and non-extraction protocols: a comparative study of fixed orthodontic appliance and clear aligners

Majedh Abdo Ali Al-Somairi  1   2 , Yuwen Yan  1 , Maged S Alhammadi  3 , Naseem Ali Al-Worafi  1   2 , Enas Senan Alyafrusee  1   2 , Bushra Sufyan Almaqrami  4   5 , Hasan M Sharhan  1 , Barakat Al-Tayar  1   5 , Bowen Zheng  6 , Yi Liu  7
Affiliations
Comparative Study

Three-dimensional pharyngeal airway and hyoid bone changes in skeletal class I malocclusion treated with extraction and non-extraction protocols: a comparative study of fixed orthodontic appliance and clear aligners

Majedh Abdo Ali Al-Somairi et al. Clin Oral Investig. .

Abstract

Objectives: This study aimed to provide a comprehensive three-dimensional (3D) evaluation of fixed appliances (FAs) and clear aligners (CAs) on pharyngeal airway (PA) dimensions and hyoid bone (HB) positioning in skeletal Class I malocclusion patients treated with extraction and non-extraction protocols, comparing the effects within each protocol.

Materials and methods: This retrospective study involved 120 adult patients divided into extraction and non-extraction groups, each further subdivided equally into those treated with FAs and CAs. PA segmentation and measurements were conducted with Dolphin 11.8 (Dolphin Imaging and Management Solutions, Chatsworth, CA). The PA was analyzed in the nasopharyngeal (NP), oropharyngeal (OP), and hypopharyngeal (HP), total pharyngeal (TP) airway, while HB parameters were measured using InVivo 6.0.3 (Anatomage, San Jose, CA). Descriptive and analytical statistics were performed, with a significance level set at P < 0.05.

Results: None of the evaluated parameters showed a significant difference in the baseline, indicating almost comparable groups. Inter-group comparisons showed that within the non-extraction group, FAs caused greater decreases in OP sagittal width and HP lateral width and more significant increases in vertical hyoid position (H-FH) compared to CAs (P < 0.05). In the extraction group, FAs resulted in greater decreases in OP lateral width and volume, HP volume, and more significant H-FH increases than CAs (P < 0.05).

Conclusion: Fixed appliances caused greater reductions in oropharyngeal and hypopharyngeal dimensions and more significant changes in hyoid bone position compared to clear aligners, particularly in extraction cases. Clinicians should consider these effects when selecting treatment modalities, especially for patients with airway concerns.

Clinical relevance: Fixed appliances significantly impact pharyngeal airway dimensions and hyoid bone positioning, while clear aligners have milder effects, emphasizing the need for careful treatment planning.

Keywords: Class I malocclusion; Clear aligners; Extraction; Fixed appliances; Hyoid bone; Non-extraction; Pharyngeal airway.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Declarations. Ethics approval and consent to participate: The study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Hospital of Stomatology of China Medical University (Approval No.CMUKQ-2024-034), and all methods adhered to the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki. Informed consent was obtained from all participants prior to their inclusion in the study. Informed consent: The requirement for informed consent was waived due to the retrospective nature of the study. Competing interests: The authors declare no competing interests.

Similar articles

See all similar articles

References

    1. Karaman A, Güdük Z, Genc E (2023) Evaluation of pharyngeal airway dimensions and cephalometric changes after premolar extraction and nonextraction orthodontic treatment in adolescent and adult patients. J Stomatol Oral Maxillofac Surg 124:101275. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jormas.2022.08.018 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Sheng CM, Lin LH, Su Y, Tsai HH (2009) Developmental changes in pharyngeal airway depth and hyoid bone position from childhood to young adulthood. Angle Orthod 79:484–490. https://doi.org/10.2319/062308-328.1 - DOI - PubMed
    1. McNamara JA (1981) Influence of respiratory pattern on craniofacial growth. Angle Orthod 51:269–300. https://doi.org/10.1043/0003-3219(1981)051%3C0269:IORPOC%3E2.0.CO;2
    1. Chen Y, Hong L, Wang CL, Zhang SJ, Cao C, Wei F, Lv T, Zhang F, Liu DX (2012) Effect of large incisor Retraction on upper airway morphology in adult bimaxillary protrusion patients angle orthod. 82:964–970. https://doi.org/10.2319/110211-675.1
    1. Al-Somairi MAA, Liu Y, Almashraq AA, Almaqrami BS, Alshoaibi LH, Alyafrusee ES, Al-Tayar B, An X, Alhammadi MS (2023) Correlation between the three-dimensional maxillomandibular complex parameters and pharyngeal airway dimensions in different sagittal and vertical malocclusions. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 52:20220346. https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr.20220346 - DOI - PubMed - PMC

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources