A New Growth Prediction Method Involving Maxillofacial Hard and Soft Tissue Calibrations- A Radiological Analysis

A radiological growth prediction method using various cephalometric calibrations.

  • Dr.Neha Patil Bhabha University, bhopal
  • Dr. Purva Joneja
  • Dr. Dhanvarsha Sarvade
Keywords: nasolabial angle, ramus length, cephalometric radiograph


OBJECTIVE: Growth prediction is of key importance in pediatric patients as well as growing individuals opting for orthodontic or orthopedic treatment. The objective of this study is to assess a new growth prediction method involving maxillofacial hard and soft tissue calibrations. Orthodontic treatment is most favourable and effective during pubertal growth and hence growth assessment and prediction are significant in planning treatment for dental and maxillofacial abnormalities. It can also be helpful in diagnosis of various growth disorders in pediatric patients.

MATERIAL AND METHOD: The sample comprises of standardized lateral cephalometric radiograph with the size of 100 subjects including male and female of 8-16 years of age who visited Department of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics. All cephalometric radiographs were taken and the chosen hard and soft tissue calibrations like ramus length and nasolabial angle and CVM staging were evaluated and correlated using One-way ANOVA and Spearman correlation.

RESULT:  CVM staging showed positive correlation with ramus length and age but  no correlation with nasolabial angle. One-way ANOVA showed highly significant correlation of age, NLA and RL values between different CVM stages and Spearman correlation showed highly significant correlation of CVM with age, NLA and RL

CONCLUSION: Growth can also be predicted from ramus length and age of the patient as the study shows positive correlation between CVM staging and ramus length but no correlation with nasolabial angle. The calibrations are correlated to each other as cvm directly proportional to ramus length and age  and inversely proportional to nasolabial angle.


1. Baidas L. Correlation between cervical vertebrae morphology and chronological age in Saudi adolescents. King Saud University Journal of Dental Sciences. 2012 Jan 1;3(1):21-6.
2. Fishman LS. Radiographic evaluation of skeletal maturation: a clinically oriented method based on hand-wrist films. The Angle Orthodontist. 1982 Apr;52(2):88-112.

3. Chen HS, Hsiao SY, Lee KT. Analysis of Facial Skeletal Morphology: Nasal Bone, Maxilla, and Mandible. BioMed Research International. 2021 May 25;2021.
4. Begg RJ, Harkness M. A lateral cephalometric analysis of the adult nose. Journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery. 1995 Nov 1;53(11):1268-74.
5. Van der Heijden P, Korsten-Meijer AG, van der Laan BF, Wit HP, Goorhuis-Brouwer SM. Nasal growth and maturation age in adolescents: a systematic review. Archives of Otolaryngology–Head & Neck Surgery. 2008 Dec 15;134(12):1288-93.
6. Baccetti, T., Franchi, L., McNamara, J.A., 2002. An improved version of the cervical vertebral maturation (CVM) method for the assessment of mandibular growth. Angle Orthod. 72 (4), 316–323.
7. Basaran, G., Ozer, T., Hamamci, 2007. Cervical vertebral and dental maturity in Turkish subjects. Am. J. Orthod. Dentfacial Orthop. 131 (4), e13–20, 447.
8. Başaran G, Ozer T, Hamamci N. Cervical vertebral and dental maturity in Turkish subjects. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2007 Apr;131(4):447.e13-20. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2006.08.016. PMID: 17418707.
9. Tofani MI. Mandibular growth at puberty. American Journal of Orthodontics. 1972 Aug 1;62(2):176-95.
10. Wani A, Chalkoo A, Tariq S, Bedar A Assessment of bone age by cervical vertebral dimensions in lateral cephalometric radiographs, JOOM, 2018;4(3),160-63
11. Krogman, W. M.: The concept of maturity from a morphological viewpoint, Child Dev. 21: 25, 1950.
12. Richey, H. G.: The relation of accelerated normal and retarded puberty on the height and weight of school children, Monograph of the Society for Research in Child Development, vol. 2, No. 1, 1937.
13. Abernethy, E. M.: ReIationship between mental and physical growth, Monograph of the Society for Research in Child Development, vol. 1, No. 7, 1936.
14. Todd T, Pyle SI. Quantitative study of the vertebral column. Am J Phys Anthropol. 1928;12:321.
15. Lanier R. Presacral vertebrae of white and Negro males. Am J Phys Anthropol. 1939;25:341–417.
16. Taylor JR. Growth of human intervertebral discs and vertebral bodies. J Anat. 1975;120:49–68.
17. Gray H, Clemente CD. Anatomy of the Human Body. 30th ed. Philadelphia, Penn: Lea & Febiger; 1985.
18. Bick E, Copel J. Longitudinal growth of the human vertebrae. J Bone Joint Surg (Am). 1950;32A:803–813.
19. Hassel B, Farman A. Skeletal maturation evaluation using cervical vertebrae. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1995;107:58– 66.
20. O’Reilly M, Yanniello GJ. Mandibular growth changes and maturation of cervical vertebrae–a longitudinal cephalometric study. Angle Orthod. 1988;58:179–184.
21. Lamparski DG. Skeletal Age Assessment Utilizing Cervical Vertebrae [Master’s thesis]. Pittsburgh, Penn: Department of Orthodontics, The University of Pittsburgh; 1972.
How to Cite
Patil, D., Joneja, D. P., & Sarvade, D. D. (2023). A New Growth Prediction Method Involving Maxillofacial Hard and Soft Tissue Calibrations- A Radiological Analysis. UNIVERSITY JOURNAL OF DENTAL SCIENCES, 10(1). https://doi.org/10.21276/ujds.2024.10.1.2