BioMed Research International / 2019 / Article / Tab 1

Research Article

Comparison of Pharyngeal Airway between Mandibular Setback Surgery Patients (Skeletal Class III) and Nonsurgery Patients (Skeletal Classes I and II)

Table 1

Patients characteristics in the skeletal classifications.

Variables Class I (n= 40) Class II (n= 40) Class III (n= 40)Preoperation intergroup comparison
MeanSDMeanSDMeanSDFP valueSignificant

C4C2-SN angle106.46.44107.16.5996.37.3131.158< 0.001II > III, I > III
Palatal angle123.05.33125.95.50118.36.7117.005< 0.001II > III, I > III
Soft palate length36.04.3237.34.9032.73.0412.794< 0.001II > III, I > III
Soft palate width8.61.628.41.629.61.635.7620.004III > II, III > I
Pharyngeal airway
 NOP23.53.7225.32.7923.23.004.9090.009II > III, II > I
 UOP12.33.3111.52.4915.23.0817.37< 0.001III > II, III > I
 TOP12.93.6112.03.3116.64.5016.253< 0.001III > II, III > I
 EOP7.92.417.92.599.64.393.6740.052
Pogonion
 Horizontal69.57.9263.66.6979.69.3440.093< 0.001III > I > II
 Vertical124.69.14124.06.62121.69.251.3920.253
Hyoid
 Horizontal17.37.8614.17.1323.19.5712.194< 0.001III > II, III > I
 Vertical123.110.60122.810.65123.711.200.0680.934

n: number of patient
I: Class I, II: Class II, III: Class III
NOP: nasopharyngeal airway, UOP: uvulopharyngeal airway
TOP: shortest distance from posterior tongue to pharyngeal wall, EOP: distance from epiglottis to pharyngeal wall
Statistically significant, p < 0.05
–: Not significant

Article of the Year Award: Outstanding research contributions of 2020, as selected by our Chief Editors. Read the winning articles.