Features cephalometric indicators in boys and girls of various craniotypes with physiological occlusion

  • I. V. Gunas National Pirogov Memorial Medical University, Vinnytsya, Ukraine
  • А.V. Маrchenko The Higher State Educational Establishment of Ukraine "Ukrainian Medical Stomatological Academy", Poltava, Ukraine
  • Yu.V. Kyrychenko National Pirogov Memorial Medical University, Vinnytsya, Ukraine
  • E.M. Anisimov Bogomolets National Medical University, Kyiv, Ukraine
Keywords: cephalometry, practically healthy boys and girls, craniotype, physiological bite


The study of the features of the general shape and size of the cerebral and facialskull is a necessary link in the system of complex morphometric evaluation of thestructures of the tooth-jaw system. The purpose of the study is to establish the featuresof cephalometric indices in young men and girls of different craniotypes with physiologicalbite. Cephalometric study consisted of determination of parameters of the cerebral andfacial sections of the head of 44 boys and 50 girls with physiological bite. The form ofthe head was determined by the formula ms_ms * 100 / g_op, where ms_ms is thelargest head width (occipital diameter); g_op - the largest length of the head (distancefrom glabella to opisthokranion). Up to a value of 75.9 men attributed to dolichocephals;76,0-80,9 - to mesocephals; 81,0-85,4 - to brachycephals. Statistical processing ofthe obtained results was carried out using the statistical software package "Statistica6.1" using nonparametric methods. The reliability of the difference between independentquantitative values was determined using the Man-Whitney U-criterion. Found thatdolichocephalic and hiperbrahitsefalichna shape of the head are the most rare: amongboys 6 dolichocephals found, 16 mesocephals, 19 brachycephals, 3hyperbrachycephals; and among girls - 1 dolichocephals, 16 mesocephals, 26brachycephals, 7 hyperbrachycephals. When comparing craniotypological differencesin cephalometric indices, it was found that the sagittal arc, the greatest length of thehead, the height of the red lumbar lobe in the mesocephals is significantly greater ortends to be larger than brachycephals. Conversely, the largest and smallest headwidth, face width, outer-orbital width, inter-orbital width, width of the mandible, thedistance from the auricular point to the angle of the mandible in the mesocephals issignificantly lower or tends to lower values compared to brachycephals. The value ofcephalometric parameters in young men is significantly higher than that of girls, whichis confirmed by the results of studies on the general tendency of preferences ofcephalometric linear dimensions in males. We did not detect significant sexualdifferences for only the average face width and forehead height. As a result of thestudies conducted, regardless of sex, there are significantly higher longitudinal andsmaller transverse dimensions of the facial and cerebellum of the skull in themesocephals than brachycephals.


[1]. Abolhasanzadeh, A., & Farahani, M. R. (2003). Standarded international classification of head shapes of 22-24 years old in Tehran. J. of Research in Medicine, 26, 281-285.
[2]. Alexeev, V. P., & Debets, G. F. (1964). Kraniometriya. Metodika antropologicheskih issledovaniy. M.: Nauka.
[3]. Allanson, J. E., Cunniff, C., Hoyme, H. E., McGaughran, J., Muenke, M., & Neri, G. (2009). Elements of morphology: standard terminology for the head and face. Am. J. Med. Genet., 149A(1), 6-28. doi: 10.1002/ajmg.a.32612.
[4]. Arslan, S. G., Genç, C., Odabaş, B., & Kama, J. D. (2008). Comparison of facial proportions and anthropometric norms among Turkish young adults with different face types. Aesthetic Plast. Surg., 32(2), 234-242. doi:10.1007/s00266-007-9049-y.
[5]. Bunak, V. V. (1941). Antropometriya. Prakticheskiy kurs. M.: Uchpedgiz.
[6]. Da Silva, M. B., & Sant'Anna, E. F. (2013). The evolution of cephalometric diagnosis in orthodontics. Dental Press J. Orthod., 18, 3, 63-71. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S2176-94512013000300011.
[7]. Evereklioglu, C. S., Doganay, H., Gunduz, A., Terkan, M., Balt, A., & Cumurcu, T. (2006). Morphological Evaluation of Head and Face in 18-25 Years Old Women in Southeast of Iran. J. Med. Sci., 6(3), 400-404. doi: 10.3923/jms.2006.400.404.
[8]. Farishta, S., Varma, D. P., Reddy, K. S., Chandra, S., & Nanda, Z. (2011). Cephalometric evaluation-based on Steiner’s analysis on young adults of Chhattisgarh, India. J. Contemp. Dent. Pract., 12(3), 174-178.
[9]. Franco, F. C. M., de Araujo, T. M., Vogel, C. J., & Quintão, C. C. A. (2013). Brachycephalic, dolichocephalic and mesocephalic: Is it appropriate to describe the face using skull patterns? Dental Press. J. Orthod., 18(3), 159-163. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S2176-94512013000300025.
[10]. Gunas, I. V., Shinkaruk-Dykovytska, M. M., Kotsyura, O. O., Orlovskiy, V. O., Dmytrenko, S. V., Shayuk, A. V., & Glushak, A. A. (2017). Differences of craniotype distribution and types of face among apparently healthy men from different regions of Ukraine. Folia Morphol., 76(3), 473-477. doi: 10.5603/FM.a2017.0017.
[11]. Hossain, Md. G., Sabiruzzaman, Md., Islam, S., Ohtsuki, F., & Lestrel, P. E. (2010). Effect of craniofacial measures on the cephalic index of Japanese adult female students. Anthropological Science, 118(2), 117-121. doi: 10.1537/ase.091022.
[12]. Ilayperuma, I. (2011). Evaluation of Cephalic Indices: A Clue for Racial and Sex Diversity. Int. J. Morphol., 29(1), 112-117.
[13]. Klingenberg, C. P. (2009). Morphometric integration and modularity in configurations of landmarks: tools for evaluating a priori hypotheses. Evol. Dev., 11, 405-421. doi: 10.1111/j.1525-142X.2009.00347.x.
[14]. Kondo, S., Wakatsuki, E., & Shibagaki, H. A. (1999). Somatometric study of the head and face in Japanese adolescents. Okajimas Folia Anat. Jpn., 76, 179-185.
[15]. Kumar, B. S., Shree, V. P., & Revathi, P. (2009). Dentofacial cephalometric norms for Hyderabad population. J. Orofacial. Sci., 1(1), 7-13.
[16]. Mahajan, A., Khurana, B. S., Seema, & Singh, B. A. P. (2010). The study of cephalic index in Punjabi students. Journal of Punjab Academy of Forensic medicine and Toxicology, 10, 24-26.
[17]. Mane, D. R., Kale, A. D., Bhai, M. B., & Hallikerimath, S. (2010). Anthropometric and anthroposcopic analysis of different shapes of faces in group of Indian population: a pilot study. J. Forensic. Leg. Med., 17(8), 421-425. doi: 10.1016/j.jflm.2010.09.001.
[18]. Mitteroecker, P., & Gunz, P. (2009). Advances in geometric morphometrics. Evol. Biol., 36, 235-247. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11692-009-9055-x.
[19]. Muzurova, L. V., Rezugin, А. M., & Konnov, V. V. (2007). Vozrastnaya i individualnaya izmenchivost verhney i nizhney chelyustey u lits s ortognaticheskim prikusom. Saratovskiy nauchno-meditsinskiy zhurnal, 3(17), 34-36.
[20]. Noback, M. L., & Harvati, К. (2015) Covariation in the Human Masticatory Apparatus. The anatomical record, 298, 64-84. https://doi.org/10.1002/ar.23067.
[21]. Oladipo, G. S., Olotu, J. E., & Suleiman, Y. (2009). Anthropometric studies of cephalic indices of the Ogonis in Nigeria. Asian J. Med. Sci., 1, 15-17.
[22]. Reyes-Centeno, H., Ghirotto, S., Détroit, F., Grimaud-Hervé, D., Barbujani, G., & Harvatia, K. (2014). Genomic and cranial phenotype data support multiple modern human dispersals from Africa and a southern route into Asia. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 111(20), 7248-7253. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1323666111.
[23]. Thilander, B. (2009). Dentoalveolar development in subjects with normal occlusion. A longitudinal study between the ages of 5 and 31 years. Eur. J. Orthod., 31(2), 109-120. doi: 10.1093/ejo/cjn124.
[24]. Tikku, T., Khanna, R., Maurya, R. P., Verma, S. L., Srivastava, K., & Kadu, M. (2014). Cephalometric norms for orthognathic surgery in North Indian population using Nemoceph software. J. Oral Biol. Craniofac. Res., 94-103. doi: 10.1016/j.jobcr.2014.07.004.
[25]. Trivedi, K., Singh, S., Shivamurthy, D. M., Doshi, J., Shyagali, T., & Patel, B. (2010). Analysis of cephalometrics for orthognathic surgery: determination of norms applicable to Rajasthani population. Natl. J. Maxillofac. Surg., 1(2), 102-107. doi: 10.4103/0975-5950.79209.
[26]. Vojdani, Z., Bahmanpour, S., Momeni, S., Vasaghi, A., Yazdizadeh, A., Karamifar, A., … Mokhtar, A. (2009). Cephalometry in 14-18 years old girls and boys of Shiraz-Iran high school. Int. J. Morphol., 27, 101-104. doi: 10.4067/S0717-95022009000100018.
[27]. Vovk, Y. N., & Bekov, D. B. (2001). Individualnaya anatomicheskaya izmen- chivost i anatomicheskaya norma stroeniya cheloveka. Problemi ekologichnoyi ta medichnoyi genetiki i klinichnoyi imunologiyi, 7(39), 81-89.
[28]. Vovk, Y. N., & Vovk, О. Y. (2016). Perspektivyi i novyie napravleniya ucheniya ob individualnoy anatomicheskoy izmenchivosti. Vestnik problem biologii i meditsinyi, 2, 1(128), 376-379.
[29]. Vovk, О. Y. (2011). Kraniometricheskie osobennosti cherepa detey v vozraste pervogo detstva (4-7 let). VIsnik problem bIologiyi i meditsini, 2(2), 38-40.
[30]. Yadav, A. O., Walia, C. S., Borle, R. M., Chaoji, K. H., Rajan, R., & Datarkar, A. N. (2011). Cephalometric norms for Central Indianpopulation using Burstone and Legan analysis. Indian J. Dent. Res., 22(1), 28-33. doi: 10.4103/0970-9290.79970.
[31]. Zaichenko, A. A. (2008). Constructional typology of human cerebral cranium. The theses are presented in the materials of XLVII Congress of Anthropological Society of Serbia with international participation, Kruševac (р. 96). Kruševac: [w.p.h].
[32]. Zulkina, L. А. (2009). Osobennosti kranio-fatsialnogo kompleksa u zhiteley penzenskogo regiona. Tezisyi predstavlenyi v mater. Vseross. nauchno-prakt. konf.: Sotsialnyie problemyi meditsinyi i ekologii cheloveka, Saratov (str. 407). Saratov: [b. i.].
How to Cite
Gunas, I. V., МаrchenkoА., Kyrychenko, Y., & Anisimov, E. (2018). Features cephalometric indicators in boys and girls of various craniotypes with physiological occlusion. Biomedical and Biosocial Anthropology, (30), 13-19. https://doi.org/10.31393/bba30-2018-02

Most read articles by the same author(s)