Masseter Muscle Thickness and Craniofacial Skeletal Patterns
The Relationship Between Masseter Muscle Thickness and Different Craniofacial Skeletal Patterns
1 other identifier
observational
101
1 country
1
Brief Summary
Facial morphology is influenced by hard and soft tissues, including bone and muscle. While numerous factors can lead to changes in bone tissue, soft tissues such as muscle also have an important influence. It is widely acknowledged that the function, shape and thickness of masticatory muscles have substantial effects on facial morphology and skeletal development, and are correlate with other anthropometric variables. Furthermore, a correlation has been observed between masseter muscle thickness and various characteristics of the dental arches, such as alveolar process thickness and intermaxillary width. The evaluation of soft tissue in the region of the face is a more challenging process in comparison to that of hard tissue.The recent development of cone beam computed tomography has improved the analysis of three-dimensional skeletal morphology and jaw. However, the radiographic assessment of soft tissue remains more difficult.The thickness of masticatory muscles can be measured using computerised tomography; however, this has the disadvantage of exposing the patient to radiation. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is an imaging technique that can be used to assess soft tissues. However, this technique is expensive and time-consuming. Furthermore, MRI is a static rather than a dynamic imaging technique, which makes it difficult to analyse during muscle contraction and relaxation. Ultrasound is a technique that provides dynamic imaging that can assess the masticatory muscles without the use of ionising radiation. There are many publications in the literature that indicate that malocclusions in the vertical and sagittal dimensions can be assessed with measurements from lateral cephalometric radiographs.
Trial Health
Trial Health Score
Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach
participants targeted
Target at P50-P75 for all trials
Started Mar 2024
Shorter than P25 for all trials
1 active site
Health score is calculated from publicly available data and should be used for screening purposes only.
Trial Relationships
Click on a node to explore related trials.
Study Timeline
Key milestones and dates
Study Start
First participant enrolled
March 1, 2024
CompletedPrimary Completion
Last participant's last visit for primary outcome
December 10, 2024
CompletedStudy Completion
Last participant's last visit for all outcomes
February 24, 2025
CompletedFirst Submitted
Initial submission to the registry
March 5, 2025
CompletedFirst Posted
Study publicly available on registry
March 11, 2025
CompletedMarch 14, 2025
December 1, 2023
9 months
March 5, 2025
March 11, 2025
Conditions
Keywords
Outcome Measures
Primary Outcomes (1)
The correlation between masseter muscle thickness and sagittal skeletal malocclusions
The masseter muscle was measured in millimetres using ultrasound, while different skeletal malocclusions were classified using the angles between anatomical landmarks on lateral cephalometric radiographs. Intertermolar distance was measured in millimetres using an electronic caliper intraorally in the clinic. Facial index was calculated and classified using standard facial photographs, with millimetre measurements obtained using ImageJ software. The patients' height and weight were measured in centimetres and kilograms, respectively, and their body mass index was calculated.
Just at the enrollment of the patients
Study Arms (12)
Class I
Patients with ANB angle between 0-4 degrees were classified as class I.
Class II
Patients with ANB angle greater than 4 degrees were classified as class II.
Class III
Patients with ANB angle less than 0 degrees were classified as class III.
Normodivergent
Patients with SN/GoGn angle between 28 and 36 were classified as normodivergent.
Hyperdivergent
Patients with SN/GoGn angle greater than 36 degrees were classified as hyperdivergent.
Hypodivergent
Patients with SN/GoGn angle less than 28 degrees were classified as hypodivergent.
Brachyfacial
If the facial index value was less than 84%, it was classified as brachyfacial.
Mesofacial
A facial index value between 84% and 88% was classified as mesofacial.
Dolichofacial
If the facial index value was greater than 88%, it was classified as dolichofacial.
Intermolar width
The intertermolar distance was measured in millimetres. This measurement was taken from the mesiopalatinal surfaces of two maxillary first permanent molars at the level of the cervical. The measurement was taken using an electronic caliper.
Body Mass Index
The Body Mass Index is calculated by measuring with a standardised scale and height chart.
Masseter muscle thickness
Interventions
The masseter muscle thickness measurements were performed in B mode of ultrasound, midline between the zygomatic arch and mandibular plane, parallel to the mandibular plane and perpendicular to the mandibular ramus. Prior to the examination being performed in the resting position, the patient was instructed to make minimal contact between the lips without the teeth touching each other.The first USG image was recorded in this position. The patient was then requested to clench their teeth as firmly as possible, after which a second USG image was recorded from the same area. The thickness of the muscles was measured again on second recorded images. To ensure the reliability of the measurements, these procedures were repeated by the same researcher after the patients rested for five minutes.
Standard lateral cephalometric radiographs were obtained from the patients.
Standard facial photographs were taken from a distance of 1.5 metres.
The Body Mass Index is calculated by measuring with a standardised scale and height chart.
The intermaxillary distance is measured from the cervical level of the palatal surfaces of the first permanent molars to their mesial corners using an electronic caliper.
Eligibility Criteria
Healthy patients with orthodontic malocclusion were included in the study.
You may qualify if:
- Patients who were 18 years of age or older,
- had skeletal malocclusion,
- were systemically healthy,
- were not taking any medication,
- had no missing teeth except for the third molars,
- had no history of congenital and/or acquired anomalies in the lips, mouth and facial regions,
- had not received orthodontic treatment before
You may not qualify if:
- were younger than 18 years of age
- were with systemic disease,
- used antidepressant drugs before,
- has bruxism habit,
- had orthodontic treatment or has active orthodontic treatment,
- had history of trauma and surgery in the maxillofacial region
Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.
Sponsors & Collaborators
Study Sites (1)
Kutahya Health Science University
Kütahya, 43100, Turkey (Türkiye)
Related Publications (1)
Togninalli D, Antonarakis GS, Papadopoulou AK. Relationship between craniofacial skeletal patterns and anatomic characteristics of masticatory muscles: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Prog Orthod. 2024 Sep 9;25(1):36. doi: 10.1186/s40510-024-00534-2.
PMID: 39245691BACKGROUND
MeSH Terms
Conditions
Interventions
Condition Hierarchy (Ancestors)
Intervention Hierarchy (Ancestors)
Study Design
- Study Type
- observational
- Observational Model
- COHORT
- Time Perspective
- PROSPECTIVE
- Target Duration
- 1 Day
- Sponsor Type
- OTHER
- Responsible Party
- PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
- PI Title
- Assist. Prof.
Study Record Dates
First Submitted
March 5, 2025
First Posted
March 11, 2025
Study Start
March 1, 2024
Primary Completion
December 10, 2024
Study Completion
February 24, 2025
Last Updated
March 14, 2025
Record last verified: 2023-12
Data Sharing
- IPD Sharing
- Will not share