Correlation between the three-dimensional maxillomandibular complex parameters and pharyngeal airway dimensions in different sagittal and vertical malocclusions.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to determine the three-dimensional (3D) correlation between maxillomandibular complex parameters and pharyngeal airway dimensions in different sagittal and vertical malocclusions. METHODS: This retrospective cross-sectional study included the CBCT scans of 368 patients with a mean age of 23.81 ± 3.01 years. The patients were classified into three groups (skeletal Class I, II, and III). Each class group was divided into three subgroups based on vertical growth patterns (hypo-, normo-, and hyperdivergent). The maxillomandibular complex was evaluated in the three planes using 16 skeletal measurements. Naso-, oro-, hypo-, and total pharyngeal airway spaces were assessed in terms of width, volume, surface area, and minimum constricted area (MCA). Two-way ANOVA followed by the Bonferroni post-hoc test were used. RESULTS: The nasopharyngeal airway space was significantly lowest regarding sagittal and lateral widths in the skeletal Class III patients, the lowest volume and surface area were in hyperdivergent patients, and MCA was the highest in Class II and hypodivergent patients. The oro- and hypopharyngeal sagittal width, volume, surface area, and MCA were the lowest in the hyperdivergent patients, and oropharyngeal lateral width and hypopharyngeal sagittal width were the highest in skeletal Class III. The total pharyngeal volume, surface area, and MCA were the lowest in the hyperdivergent patients, and skeletal Class II patients had the lowest MCA. CONCLUSIONS: The pharyngeal airway dimensions differ with various sagittal and vertical malocclusions. These differences could apply to diagnosis, treatment planning, and possible changes following orthodontic/orthopedic or surgical treatment.

Research waste-related editorial policies of leading dental journals: Situation 2018.

OBJECTIVES: To study whether specific recommendations aimed at reducing avoidable research waste were included in the author instructions of leading dental journals. METHOD: We identified 109 peer-reviewed and original research-oriented dental journals that were indexed in the MEDLINE and/or SCIE database in 2018. Two authors extracted independently information regarding the endorsement of reporting guidelines (RGs), ICMJE recommendations, trial or systematic review registration, and open access (OA) and data sharing policies. RESULT: All 109 journals provided online "instructions to authors," among which 64 journals (58.7%) mentioned RGs. The ICMJE recommendations were endorsed by 74 journals (67.9%), and trial and systematic review registration were mentioned by 48 (44.0%) and 6 (5.5%) of the journals, respectively. In terms of OA, most journals stated they were hybrid OA (82.0%) and direct OA (15.4%), while data sharing policy was recommended by 32 (29.4%) journals. Statistical analyses suggest that these policies were more frequently mentioned by SCIE-indexed journals, higher-impact journals, and journals that endorsed the ICMJE recommendations. CONCLUSION: Reporting guidelines, OA and data sharing are important tools for enhancing research communication, translation and the reduction of avoidable research waste. However, currently they are not widely endorsed by dental journals.