Influence of Age and Craniofacial Pattern on Infrazygomatic Crest Bone Thickness in Indian Patients: A Cone-Beam Computed Tomography Study

BackgroundInfrazygomatic crest (IZC) miniscrews provide extra-alveolar orthodontic anchorage.Local bone dimensions are among the anatomical factors that may influence primary stability.The relationship of IZC bone thickness to chronological age and vertical facial type remains clinically relevant. ObjectiveThis study aimed to compare IZC bone thickness across three age groups and three vertical facial types in an Indian cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) sample.The primary outcome was IZC bone thickness at 9, 11, 13, and 15 mm reference levels; secondary outcomes were overall mean thickness and the reported divergence angle, recommended insertion height, and suggested screw length. HypothesisThe null hypotheses were that (1) IZC bone thickness would not differ among the three age groups and (2) IZC bone thickness would not differ among the three vertical facial-type groups.These hypotheses are tested separately in the analyses; the design does not establish an independent effect of facial type after adjustment for age or other potential confounders. MethodsThis retrospective cross-sectional observational study included 90 CBCT scans from Indian patients aged 14-39 years retrieved from the archives of MNR Dental College and Hospital, Sangareddy, Telangana, India.It included 90 CBCT scans from Indian patients aged 14-39 years.Thirty participants were included in each age group (14-19, 20-29, and 30-39 years) and each facial-type group (brachyfacial, mesofacial, and dolichofacial).IZC thickness was recorded at 9, 11, 13, and 15 mm reference levels. ResultsThe submitted results showed no statistically significant age-group differences at 9, 11, 13, or 15 mm (reported p = 0.451, 0.971, 0.666, and 0.417, respectively) or in the overall mean thickness (p = 0.993).Reported mean thickness differed across facial-type groups: 1.92 ± 0.08 mm for brachyfacial, 1.62 ± 0.08 mm for mesofacial, and 1.41 ± 0.06 mm for dolichofacial participants (reported p < 0.001).These values and pvalues must be checked against the raw data and analysis output before use. ConclusionIn this sample, the reported analyses did not identify statistically significant differences in IZC thickness across age groups, while thickness differed across the reported vertical facial-type groups.Because potential confounders were not jointly adjusted, the findings should be interpreted as preliminary anatomical associations, not proof that facial type independently determines IZC thickness or predicts miniscrew success.