European Archives of Paediatric Dentistry

, Volume 19, Issue 5, pp 331–336 | Cite as

Upper cervical spine and craniofacial morphology in hypohidrotic ectodermal dysplasia

  • L. SonnesenEmail author
  • A. Jasemi
  • H. Gjørup
  • J. Daugaard-Jensen
Original Scientific Article



Morphological deviations in the upper cervical spine and craniofacial morphology in patients with X-linked hypohidrotic ectodermal dysplasia (XLHED) were compared to non-syndromic controls.


All children and adolescents with genetically verified XLHED, registered at the Resource Centres for Oral Health in Rare Diseases, who met the inclusion criteria, were included. The group thus comprised 15 XLHED patients (3 girls and 12 boys, aged 8–16 years, mean 11.2 years). The control group comprised 22 non-syndromic pre-orthodontic children (14 girls and 8 boys aged 9–16 years, mean 11.9 years) with agenesis of one tooth, neutral occlusion and normal craniofacial morphology. The craniofacial and upper spine morphology was analysed on lateral cephalograms by standard methods. Differences between XLHED patients and controls were tested and adjusted for age and gender by multiple regression analyses.


Morphological deviations in the upper spine occur significantly more often in XLHED patients compared to controls (60 vs. 9.1%; p < 0.01). The cranial base angle (n-s-ar, p < 0.05), sagittal jaw relationship (ss-n-pg, p < 0.001), maxillary inclination (NSL/NL, p < 0.001) and mandibular inclination (NSL/ML, p < 0.01) were significantly smaller in XLHED patients compared to controls. The mandibular prognathia (s-n-pg) was significantly larger in XLHED patients compared to controls (p < 0.05).


The upper spine and the craniofacial morphology were different in XLHED patients compared to controls. The results of this study may contribute to a further understanding of the craniofacial and spinal phenotypic spectrum in patients with XLHED and thus have implications for diagnosis and treatment planning of these patients.


Hypohidrotic ectodermal dysplasia Cervical vertebrae Child Craniofacial abnormalities Spinal column Notochord 



The Orthodontic clinic of the Municipal dental Service of Farum, Denmark is thanked for donating the material to the Department. Ib Jarle Christensen, Senior researcher, Department of Gastroenterology, Hvidovre Hospital, Denmark, is acknowledged for statistical advice. Jens Bjørn-Jørgensen is thanked for guidance regarding the use of TIOPS. Copenhagen University Research Foundation (21-12-2012) is acknowledged for funding.


This study was funded by Copenhagen University Research Foundation (21-12-2012).

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. For this retrospective study formal consent is not required.

Informed consent

This is a retrospective study where historical radiographs form part of this study. Informed consent for obtaining the radiographs was given at the time when the radiographs were taken. The radiographs were taken in connection with treatment planning.


  1. Anderson PJ, Hall CM, Evans RD, et al. Cervical spine in Pfeiffer’s syndrome. J Craniofac Surg. 1996;7:275–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Arslan S, Kama J, Ozer T, Yavuz I. Craniofacial and upper airway cephalometric in hypohidrotic ectodermal dysplasia. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2007;36:478–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Björk A. The face in profile. Svensk Tandläkarebladet. 1947;40:5b.Google Scholar
  4. Björk A. Variations in the growth pattern of the human mandible: longitudinal radiographic study by the implant method. J Dent Res. 1963;42:400–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Björk A. Sutural growth of the upper face, studied by the implant method. Acta Odontol Scand. 1966;24:109–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Björk A, Skieller V. Growth of the maxilla in three dimensions as revealed radiographically by the implant method. Br J Orthod. 1977;4:53–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Chassaing N, Bourthoumieu S, Cossee M, Calvas P, Vincent MC. Mutations in EDAR account for one-quarter of non-ED1-related hypohidrotic ectodermal dysplasia. Hum Mutat. 2006;27:255–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Clauss F, Manière MC, Obry F, et al. Dento-craniofacial phenotypes and underlying molecular mechanisms in hypohidrotic ectodermal dysplasia (HED): a review. J Dent Res. 2008;87(12):1089–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Crawford PJ, Aldred MJ, Clarke A. Clinical and radiographic dental findings in X linked hypohidrotic ectodermal dysplasia. J Med Genet. 1991;28:181–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dahlberg G. Statistical methods for medical and biological students. New York: Interscience Publications; 1940.Google Scholar
  11. Feldens CA, Nakamura EK, Tessarollo FR, Closs LQ. Desire for orthodontic treatment and associated factors among adolescents in Southern Brazil. Angle Orthod. 2015;85:224–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Frost M, Huffer WE, Sze CI, et al. Cervical spine abnormalities in Down syndrome. Clin Neuropathol. 1999;18:250–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Gjørup H, Sonnesen L, Beck-Nielsen SS, Haubek D. Upper spine morphology in hypophosphatemic rickets and healthy controls: a radiographic study. Eur J Orthod. 2014;36:217–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Goodwin AF, Larson JR, Jones KB. Craniofacial morphometric analysis of individuals with X-linked hypohidrotic ectodermal dysplasia. Mol Genet Genom Med. 2014;2:422–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Houston WJB. The analysis of errors in orthodontic measurements. Am J Orthod. 1983;83:38290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Ioannidou-Marathiotou I, Kotsiomiti E, Gioka C. The contribution of orthodontics to the prosthodontic treatment of ectodermal dysplasia: a long-term clinical report. J Am Dent Assoc. 2010;141:1340–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Jasemi A, Sonnesen L. Tooth agenesis and craniofacial morphology in pre-orthodontic children with and without morphological deviations in the upper cervical spine. World J Stomatol. 2016;5:15–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Jensen BL. Craniofacial morphology in Turner syndrome. J Craniofac Genet Dev Biol. 1985;5:327 – 40.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Johnson EL, Roberts MW, Guckes AD. Analysis of craniofacial development in children with hypohidrotic ectodermal dysplasia. Am J Med Genet. 2002;112:327–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kjær I. Human prenatal craniofacial development related to brain development under normal and pathologic conditions. Acta Odontol Scand. 1995;53:135–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kjær I. Neuro-osteology. Crit Rev Oral Biol Med. 1998;9:224–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kreiborg S. Crouzon syndrome. A clinical and roentgencephalometric study. Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg 1981;Suppl 18:1–198.Google Scholar
  23. Kreiborg S, Barr M Jr, Cohen MM Jr. Cervical spine in the Apert syndrome. Am J Med Genet. 1992;43:704–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lexner MO, Bardow A, Bjorn-Jorgensen J. Anthropometric and cephalometric measurements in X-linked hypohidrotic ectodermal dysplasia. Orthod Craniofac Res. 2007a;10:203–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Lexner MO, Bardow A, Hertz JM, Nielsen LA, Kreiborg S. Anomalies of tooth formation in hypohidrotic ectodermal dysplasia. Int J Paediatr Dent. 2007b;17:10–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Michelsen T, Brusgaard P, Sonnesen L. Klippel-feil. A syndrome in the occipital-cervical spine field and its dentofacial manifestations. World J Stomatol. 2015;4:81–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Rajion ZA, Townsend GC, Netherway DJ, et al. A three-dimensional computed tomographic analysis of the cervical spine in unoperated infants with cleft lip and palate. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2006;43:513–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Ruggieri M, Pascual-Castroviejo I. Hypohidrotic ectodermal dysplasia (HED). In: Ruggieri M, Pascual-Castrovejo I, Di Rocco C, editors. Neurocutaneous disorders: phakomatoses and hamartoneoplastic syndromes. Vienna: Springer; 2009. pp. 957–65.Google Scholar
  29. Ruhin B, Martinot V, Lafforgue P, et al. Pure ectodermal dysplasia: retrospective study of 16 cases and literature review. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2001;38:504–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Sadler TW. Embryology of neural tube development. Am J Med Genet C Semin Med Genet. 2005;135C(1):2–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Sandham A. Cervical vertebral anomalies in cleft lip and palate. Cleft Palate J. 1986;23:206–14.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Sonnesen L. Associations between the cervical vertebral column and craniofacial morphology. Int J Dent. 2010:295728.Google Scholar
  33. Sonnesen L. Cervical vertebral column morphology associated with head posture and craniofacial morphology. Sem Orthod. 2012;18:118–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Sonnesen L, Pedersen C, Kjær I. Cervical column morphology related to head posture, cranial base angle and condylar malformation. Eur J Orthod. 2007;29:398–403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Van Sickels JE, Raybould TP, Hicks EP. Interdisciplinary management of patients with ectodermal dysplasia. J Oral Implantol. 2010;36:239–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Yavuz I, Baskan Z, Ulku R, et al. Ectodermal dysplasia: retrospective study of fifteen cases. Arch Med Res. 2006;37:403–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© European Academy of Paediatric Dentistry 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • L. Sonnesen
    • 1
    Email author
  • A. Jasemi
    • 1
  • H. Gjørup
    • 2
  • J. Daugaard-Jensen
    • 3
  1. 1.Orthodontics, Department of Odontology, Faculty of Health and Medical SciencesUniversity of CopenhagenCopenhagen NDenmark
  2. 2.Centre for Oral Health in Rare Diseases, Department of Maxillofacial SurgeryUniversity HospitalAarhus CDenmark
  3. 3.Centre for Oral Health in Rare DiseasesUniversity Hospital of CopenhagenCopenhagen ØDenmark

Personalised recommendations