Indian Journal of Sleep Medicine

Register      Login

VOLUME 16 , ISSUE 2 ( April-June, 2021 ) > List of Articles

Original Article

Pharyngeal Airway Dimensions Assessed by Acoustic Pharyngometry in a Mixed Indian Population: A Cross-sectional Study

Sanjeev Datana, SS Agarwal, Mohit Sharma

Citation Information : Datana S, Agarwal S, Sharma M. Pharyngeal Airway Dimensions Assessed by Acoustic Pharyngometry in a Mixed Indian Population: A Cross-sectional Study. Indian Sleep Med 2021; 16 (2):40-43.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10069-0070

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 13-07-2021

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2021; The Author(s).


Background: Acoustic pharyngometry (AP) is a noninvasive modality for the assessment of upper airway dimensions. Early detection of structural narrowing of the upper airway may enable the clinician early detection of upper airway sleep disorders like obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). At present, norms for various airway parameters assessed on AP for the Indian population are not available. Material and methods: This cross-sectional study was conducted on AP records of 560 subjects (428 males and 132 females) in the age-group of 20–40 years. The study included subjects with body mass index (BMI) and neck circumference within normal limits, having a straight facial profile and Angle's class I with no discrepancy in transverse, sagittal, and vertical dimensions. The data were analyzed using a statistical package for social sciences (SPSS version 21.0, IBM Corporation, USA) for MS Windows. Results: The results of the study indicated that the mean volume of the pharyngeal airway in males and females was 27.98 cm3 and 28.5 cm3, respectively. The mean area in males and females was 2.84 cm2 and 2.85 cm2, respectively. The minimum area in males and females was 1.76 cm2 and 1.74 cm2, respectively. Conclusions: The mean values of various airway parameters obtained in the present study can serve as reference values in respect of the mixed Indian population and as a guideline for screening of large number of patients, especially with regard to the detection of the compromised upper airway.

  1. Uslu-Akcam O. Pharyngeal airway dimensions in skeletal class II: A cephalometric growth study. Imaging Sci Dent. 2017;47(1):1-9. DOI: 10.5624/isd.2017.47.1.1.
  2. McNamara JA. Influence of respiratory pattern on craniofacial growth. Angle Orthod 1981;51:269–300. DOI: 10.1043/0003-3219 (1981)051<0269:IORPOC>2.0.CO;2.
  3. Han S, Choi YJ, Chung CJ, et al. Long-term pharyngeal airway changes after bionator treatment in adolescents with skeletal Class II malocclusions. Korean J Orthod 2014;4:13–19. DOI: 10.4041/kjod.2014.44.1.13.
  4. Guttal KS, Burde KN. Cephalometric evaluation of upper airway in healthy adult population: a preliminary study. J Oral Maxillofac Radiol 2013;1:55–60. DOI: 10.4103/2321-3841.120115.
  5. Samman N, Mohammadi H, Xia J. Cephalometric norms for the upper airway in a healthy Hong Kong Chinese population. Hong Kong Med J 2003;9:25–30. DOI: 10.12809/hkmj154641.
  6. D'Urzo AD, Lawson VG, Vassal KP, et al. Airway area by acoustic response measurements and computerized tomography. Am Rev Respir 1987;125:392–398. DOI: 10.1164/arrd.1987.135.2.392.
  7. Marshall I, Maran NJ, Martin S, et al. Acoustic reflectometry for airway measurements in man: implementation and validation. Physiol Meas 1993;14:157–169. DOI: 10.1088/0967-3334/14/2/007.
  8. Qureshi NK, Hossain T, Hassan MI, et al. Neck circumference as a marker of overweight and obesity and cutoff values for Bangladeshi adults. Indian J Endocr Metab 2019;21:803–808. DOI: 10.4103/ijem.IJEM_196_17.
  9. Battagel JM, Johal A, Kotecha B. A cephalometric comparison of subjects with snoring and obstructive sleep apnoea. Eur J Orthod 2000;22:353–365. DOI: 10.1093/ejo/22.4.353.
  10. Johnston CD, Richardson A. Cephalometric changes in adult pharyngeal morphology. Eur J Orthod 1999;21:357–362. DOI: 10.1093/ejo/21.4.357.
  11. Ozbek MM, Miyamoto K, Lowe AA, et al. Natural head posture, upper airway anatomy and obstructive sleep apnoea severity in adults. Eur J Orthod 1998;20:133–143. DOI: 10.1093/ejo/20.2.133.
  12. Jackson AC, Kervans JR. Tracheal cross sectional area from acoustic reflections in dogs. J Appl Physiol 1984;57:351. DOI: 10.1152/jappl.1984.57.2.351.
  13. Fredberg JJ, Wohl MEB, Glass GM, et al. Airway area by acoustic reflections measured at the mouth. J Appl Physiol 1980;48:749–758. DOI: 10.1152/jappl.1980.48.5.749.
  14. Kamal I. Normal standard curve for acoustic pharyngometry. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2001;124:323–330. DOI: 10.1067/mhn.2001.113136.
  15. Kaur S, Rai S, Kaur M. Comparison of reliability of lateral cephalogram and computed tomography for assessment of airway space. Niger J Clin Pract 2014;17:629–636. DOI: 10.4103/1119-3077.141431.
  16. Grauer D. Pharyngeal airway volume and shape from cone-beam computed tomography: relationship to facial morphology. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2009;136:805–814. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2008.01.020.
  17. Celikoglu M. Bayram M. Comparison of pharyngeal airway volume among different vertical skeletal patterns: a cone-beam computed tomography study Angle Orthod 2014;84:782–787. DOI: 10.2319/101013-748.1.
  18. White DP, Lombard RM, Cadieux RJ, et al. Pharyngeal resistance in normal humans: influence of gender, age and obesity. J Appl Physiol 1985;58:365–371. DOI: 10.1152/jappl.1985.58.2.365.
  19. D'Urzo AD, Rebuck AS, Lawson VG, et al. Effect of CO2 on acoustic inferences of airway area. J Appl Physiol 1986;60:398–401. DOI: 10.1152/jappl.1986.60.2.398.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.