To quantitatively assess three-dimensional (3D) soft tissue facial asymmetry in patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP) who have undergone primary lip repair.
Twenty patients with UCLP were selected after a review of the records.
Inclusion Criteria
Complete UCLP; surgically treated without secondary repair. An age-matched and sex-matched Control group was employed.
Main Outcome Measures
A 3D facial symmetry plane (FSP) was obtained by superimposing the point clouds of the original 3D facial image excluding the surgical site and including lip and nose areas and those of a mirrored facial image using the iterative closest point (ICP) adjustment method. The discrepancies in the depth and angle of the normal vector of the facial surface of each point cloud between right and left sides (cleft and non-cleft sides in the UCLP group, respectively) based on FSP were calculated.
Results
Facial asymmetry in the UCLP group was significantly greater than in the Control group regarding both the discrepancies in the depth (1.34 ± 0.62, 0.73 ± 0.32 pixels, respectively) (P = .0004) and surface angle (18.0 ± 5.88, 12.8 ± 4.0°, respectively) (P = .0024). Biaxial assessment of the discrepancies in the depth and surface angle allowed us to visually extract UCLP patients with greater facial asymmetry.
Conclusions
Facial asymmetry analysis based on 3D FSP effectively facilitates the facial asymmetry quantification and soft tissue surgical outcome evaluation in patients with UCLP.
SynderHPopeAW. Psychosocial adjustment in children and adolescents with a craniofacial anomaly: diagnosis-specific patterns. Cleft Palate Craniaofac J. 2010;47(3):264-272. doi: 10.1597/08-227.1
2.
FarkasLGHajnisKPosnickJC. Anthropometric and anthoroposcopic findings of the nasal and facial region in cleft patients before and after primary lip and palate repair. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 1993;30(1):1-12. doi: 10.1597/1545-1569_1993_030_0001_aaafot_2.3.co_2
3.
EdlerRRahimMAWertherimDGreenhillD. The use of facial anthropometrics in aesthetic assessment. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2010;47(1):48-57. doi: 10.1597/08-218.1
4.
NakamuraNSasaguriMNozoeENishiharaKHasegawaHNakamuraS. Postoperative nasal forms after presurgical nasoalveolar molding followed by medial-upward advancement of the nasolabial components with vestibular expansion for children with unilateral complete cleft lip and palate. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2009;67(10):2222-2231. doi: 10.1016/j.joms.2009.04.098
5.
MatsunagaKSasaguriMMitsuyasuTOhishiMNakamuraN. Upward advancement of the nasolabial component prevents postoperative long lip following primary unilateral cleft lip repair. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2016;53(3):e71-e80. doi: 10.1597/14-272
6.
BellALoT-WRBrownD,et al.Three-dimensional assessment of facial appearance following surgical repair of unilateral cleft lip and palate. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2014;51(4):462-471. doi: 10.1597/12-140
7.
OzdermirSAEsenlikE. Three-dimensional soft tissue evaluation in patients with cleft lip and palate. Med Sci Monit. 2018;24:8608-8620. doi: 10.12659/MSM.912305
8.
PatelAIslamSMSMurrayKGoonewardeneS. Facial asymmetry assessment in adults using three-dimensional surface imaging. Prog Orthod. 2015;16:36. doi: 10.1186/s40510-015-0106-9
9.
LumVGoonewardeneMSMialnAEastwoodP. Three-dimensional assessment of facial asymmetry using dense correspondence, symmetry, and midline analysis. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2020;158(1):134-146. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2019.12.014
10.
AmirSMFuchigamiTKibeTTezukaMIshihataKNakamuraN. Reliabilities of Americleft Yardstick nasolabial appearance assessment with/without basal view for Japanese children with unilateral complete cleft lip and palate. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2019;56(7):953-959. doi: 10.1177/1055665618818679
11.
KimuraNNozoeEOkawachiTIshihataKFuchigamiTNakamuraN. Three-dimensional analyses of nasolabial forms and upper lip surface symmetry after primary lip repair in patients with complete unilateral cleft lip and palate. J Cranio Maxillofac Surg. 2019;47(2):245-252. doi: 10.1016/j.jcms.2018.11.035
12.
KimuraNKimHGOkawachiT, et al.Pilot study of visual and quantitative image analysis of facial surface asymmetry in unilateral complete cleft lip and palate. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2019;56(7):960-969. doi: 10.1177/1055665618819645
13.
HosokiDKamiyaTNomotoNOkawachiTNozoeENakamuraN. Symmetric plane detection and symmetry analysis from a 3D point cloud data of face. 20th International Conference on Control, Automation and Systems (ICCAS 2020). 2020:402-406. doi: 10.23919/ICCAS50221.2020.9268262
DalalNTriggsB. Histograms of oriented gradients for human detection. IEEE Comput Soc Conf Comput Vis Pattern Recognit. 2005;1:886-893. doi: 10.1109/CVPR.2005.177
16.
KazemiVSullivanJ. One millisecond face alignment with an ensemble of regression trees. IEEE Conf Comput Vis Pattern Recognit. 2014;1:867-1874. doi: 10.1109/CVPR.2014.241
17.
BeslPJMacKayND. A method for registration of 3-D shapes. IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell. 1992;14(2):239-256. doi: 10.1109/34.121791
18.
KimHSIshikawaSOhtsukaYShimizuHShinomiyaTViergeverM. Automatic scoliosis detection based on local centroids evaluation on moiré topographic images of human backs. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2001;20(12):1314-1320. doi: 10.1109/42.974926
19.
WuJLiangSShapiroLTseR. Measuring symmetry in children with cleft lip. Part 2. Quantification of nasolabial symmetry before and after cleft lip repair. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2016;53(6):705-713. doi: 10.1597/15-220
20.
CoghlanJKLaitungJKGPigottRW. A computer-aided method of measuring nasal symmetry in the cleft lip nose. Br J Plast Surg. 1993;46(1):13-17. doi: 10.1016/0007-1226(93)90058-j
21.
NkenkeELehnerBKramerM, et al.Determination of facial symmetry in unilateral cleft lip and palate patients from three-dimensional data: technical report and assessment of measurement errors. Cleft Palate Craniaofacial J. 2006;3(2):129-137. doi: 10.1597/04-138.1
22.
TaylerHOMorrisonCSLindenO,et al.Quantitative facial asymmetry: using three-dimensional photogrammetry to measure baseline facial surface symmetry. J Craniofac Surg. 2014;25(1):124-128. doi: 10.1097/SCS.0b013e3182a2e99d
23.
ÖwallLDarvannTAHoveHDBøgeskovLKreiborgSHermannNV. Spatially detailed 3D quantification of improve facial symmetry after surgery in children with unicoronal synostosis. Cleft Palate Craniofac J.2019;56(7):918-928. doi: 10.1177/1055665618821821
24.
ÖwallLDarvannTALarsenP,et al.Facial asymmetry in children with unicoronal synostosis who have undergone craniofacial reconstruction in infancy. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2016;53(4):385-393. doi: 10.1597/15-089
25.
Asher-MacDadeCRobertsCShawWCGallagerC. Development of a method for rating nasolabial appearance in patients with clefts of the lip and palate. Cleft Palate Craniaofac J. 1991;28(4):385-390. doi: 10.1597/1545-1569_1991_028_0385_doamfr_2.3.co_2
26.
LongREHathawayRDaskalogiannskisJ,et al.The Americleft study: an inter-center study of treatment outcomes for patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate. Part 1. Principles and study design. Cleft Palate Craniaofac J. 2011;48(3):239-243. doi: 10.1597/09-180.1
27.
MercadoAMRussellKADaskalogiannakisJ,et al.The Americleft project: a proposed expanded nasolabial appearance yardstick for 5- to 7-year-old patients with complete unilateral cleft lip and palate (CUCLP). Cleft Palate Craniaofac J. 2016;53(1):30-37. doi: 10.1597/14-017
28.
RubinMSLoweKMCloustonSShetyePRWarrenSMGraysonBH. Basal view reference photographs for nasolabial appearance rating in unilateral cleft lip and palate. Cleft Palate Craniaofac J. 2015;25(6):1548-1550. doi: 10.1097/SCS.0000000000001846
29.
LindenOETaylerHOVasudavanS,et al.Three-dimensional analysis of nasal symmetry following primary correction of unilateral cleft lip nasal deformity. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2017;54(6):715-719. doi: 10.1597/16-073
