To evaluate the quantitative values of linear and angular facial anthropometrics in patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP) and compare them with those of patients with bilateral cleft lip and palate (BCLP) using three-dimensional (3D) facial imaging.
Design
Retrospective, observational, and cross-sectional study.
Setting
Hospital for Rehabilitation of Craniofacial Anomalies/USP (HRAC/USP).
Patients/ Participants
In total, 61 non-syndromic patients with CLP who underwent multidisciplinary treatment and rehabilitated with a prosthesis were enrolled and divided into those with UCLP (G1; n = 31) and those with BCLP (G2; n = 30).
Intervention
Facial images were captured using a 3D camera after landmarks were marked on each patient's face. The software evaluated linear and angular parameters. Statistical tests were applied. Significance was determined as P < 0.05.
Main Outcome Measurements
Overall, 22 linear and 13 angular measurements were evaluated.
Results
The nasal length (P = 0.08), middle third of the face (P = 0.06), base nose width (P < 0.001), nasal root width (P < 0.001), nasal tip angle (P = 0.018), philtrum width (P < 0.001), lower face width (P = 0.039) and midfacial depth (P = 0.040) were significantly higher in G2; the upper cutaneous lip height was significantly higher in G1. Sexual dimorphism was observed except for linear measurements (linear distance between the labiale superius and labiale inferius landmarks, nasal root width, and upper cutaneous lip length) and angular measurements.
Conclusions
G2 had a greater length and width of nose and nasal root, nasal tip angle, philtrum width, and lower face width, midfacial depth, and midface third than G1. These findings also revealed the presence of sexual dimorphism.
FreitasJAGaribDGOliveiraM, et al.Rehabilitative treatment of cleft lip and palate: Experience of the Hospital for Rehabilitation of Craniofacial Anomalies-USP (HRAC-USP)–part 2: Pediatric dentistry and orthodontics. J Appl Oral Sci. 2012;20(2):268-281. doi:https://doi.org/10.1590/s1678-77572012000200024
2.
VargervikKOberoiSHoffmanWY. Team care for the patient with cleft: UCSF protocols and outcomes. J Craniofac Surg. 2009;20(Suppl 2):1668-1671. doi:https://doi.org/10.1097/SCS.0b013e3181b2d6e3
3.
BisharaSE. Cephalometric evaluation of facial growth in operated and non-operated individuals with isolated clefts of the palate. Cleft Palate J. 1973;10(3):239-246.
4.
ZhengZWFangYMLinCX. Isolated influences of surgery repair on maxillofacial growth in complete unilateral cleft lip and palate. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2016;74(8):1649-1657. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2016.03.019
5.
RossRBCoupeTB. Craniofacial morphology in six pairs of monozygotic twins discordant for cleft lip and palate. J Can Dent Assoc (Tor). 1965;31:149-157.
6.
JohnsonGP. Craniofacial analysis of patients with complete clefts of the lip and palate. Cleft Palate J. 1980;17(1):17-23.
7.
LiYShiBSongQGZuoHZhengQ. Effects of lip repair on maxillary growth and facial soft tissue development in patients with a complete unilateral cleft of lip, alveolus and palate. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2006;34(6):355-361. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcms.2006.03.005
8.
LiaoYFMarsM. Long-term effects of lip repair on dentofacial morphology in patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2005;42(5):526-532. doi:https://doi.org/10.1597/04-015.1
9.
FarkasLGHajnisKPosnickJC. Anthropometric and anthroposcopic 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:https://doi.org/10.1597/1545-1569_1993_030_0001_aaafot_2.3.co_2
Asher-McDadeCBrattströmVDahlE, et al.A six-center international study of treatment outcome in patients with clefts of the lip and palate: Part 4. Assessment of nasolabial appearance. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 1992;29(5):409-412. doi:https://doi.org/10.1597/1545-1569_1992_029_0409_asciso_2.3.co_2
12.
FerrarioVFSforzaCDellaviaCTartagliaGMSozziDCarùA. A quantitative three-dimensional assessment of abnormal variations in facial soft tissues of adult patients with cleft lip and palate. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2003;40(5):544-549. doi:https://doi.org/10.1597/1545-1569_2003_040_0544_aqtaoa_2.0.co_2
13.
CamardellaLTOngkosuwitoEMPenningEWKuijpers-JagtmanAMVilellaOVBreuningKH. Accuracy and reliability of measurements performed using two different software programs on digital models generated using laser and computed tomography plaster model scanners. Korean J Orthod. 2020;50(1):13-25. doi:https://doi.org/10.4041/kjod.2020.50.1.13
14.
De MenezesMCerón-ZapataAMLópez-PalacioAMMapelliAPisoniLSforzaC. Evaluation of a three-dimensional stereophotogrammetric method to identify and measure the palatal surface area in children with unilateral cleft lip and palate. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2016;53(1):16-21. doi:https://doi.org/10.1597/14-076
15.
de MenezesMRosatiRAllieviCSforzaC. A photographic system for the three-dimensional study of facial morphology. Angle Orthod. 2009;79(6):1070-1077. doi:https://doi.org/10.2319/111008-570
16.
RosatiRRossettiADe MenezesMFerrarioVFSforzaC. The occlusal plane in the facial context: Inter-operator repeatability of a new three-dimensional method. Int J Oral Sci. 2012;4(1):34-37. doi:https://doi.org/10.1038/ijos.2012.2
17.
CamisonLBykowskiMLeeWW, et al.Validation of the Vectra H1 portable three-dimensional photogrammetry system for facial imaging. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2018;47(3):403-410. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijom.2017.08.008
18.
GibelliDPucciarelliVCappellaADolciCSforzaC. Are portable stereophotogrammetric devices reliable in facial imaging? A validation study of VECTRA H1 device. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2018;76(8):1772-1784. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2018.01.021
19.
LundströmALundströmF. The Frankfort horizontal as a basis for cephalometric analysis. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1995;107(5):537-540. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/s0889-5406(95)70121-4
20.
FarkasLG. Anthropometry of the Head and Face. Raven Press; 1994.
21.
ZacharopoulosGVManiosAKauCHVelagrakisGTzanakakisGNde BreeE. Anthropometric analysis of the face. J Craniofac Surg. 2016;27(1):e71-e75. doi:https://doi.org/10.1097/SCS.0000000000002231
22.
DioufJSNgomPIFadigaMS, et al.Vertical photogrammetric evaluation of the soft tissue profiles of two different racial groups: A comparative study. Int Orthod. 2014;12(4):443-457. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ortho.2014.10.011
23.
DongYZhaoYBaiSWuGWangB. Three-dimensional anthropometric analysis of the Chinese nose. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2010;63(11):1832-1839. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjps.2009.11.035
24.
ChortrakarnkijPLonicDLinHHLoLJ. Establishment of a reliable horizontal reference plane for 3-dimensional facial soft tissue evaluation before and after orthognathic surgery. Ann Plast Surg. 2017;78(3 Suppl 2):S139-S147. doi:https://doi.org/10.1097/SAP.0000000000001020
25.
Alpagan OzdemirSEsenlikE. Three-dimensional soft-tissue evaluation in patients with cleft lip and palate. Med Sci Monit. 2018;24:8608-8620. doi:https://doi.org/10.12659/MSM.912305
26.
OthmanSASaffaiLWan HassanWN. Validity and reproducibility of the 3D VECTRA photogrammetric surface imaging system for the maxillofacial anthropometric measurement on cleft patients. Clin Oral Investig. 2020;24(8):2853-2866. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-019-03150-1
27.
WorasakwutiphongSChuangYFChangHWLinHHLinPJLoLJ. Nasal changes after orthognathic surgery for patients with prognathism and Class III malocclusion: Analysis using three-dimensional photogrammetry. J Formos Med Assoc. 2015;114(2):112-123. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfma.2014.10.003
28.
WongKWFKeelingAAchalKKhambayB. Using three-dimensional average facial meshes to determine nasolabial soft tissue deformity in adult UCLP patients. Surgeon. 2019;17(1):19-27. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surge.2018.04.006
29.
MeazziniMCParraviciniFDonatiVBrusatiRBiglioliFAutelitanoL. Photometric evaluation of adult patients with bilateral cleft lip and palate treated with nasoalveolar molding and primary Columella lengthening. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2022;59(7):852-858. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/10556656211024069
30.
PietruskiPMajakMPawlowskaESkibaAAntoszewskiB. A novel computer system for the evaluation of nasolabial morphology, symmetry and aesthetics after cleft lip and palate treatment. Part 2: Comparative anthropometric analysis of patients with repaired unilateral complete cleft lip and palate and healthy individuals. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2017;45(4):505-514.
31.
BilwatschSKramerMHaeuslerG, et al.Nasolabial symmetry following Tennison-Randall lip repair: A three-dimensional approach in 10-year-old patients with unilateral clefts of lip, alveolus and palate. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2006;34(5):253-262. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcms.2006.03.001
32.
Ferrari JúniorFMAyubPVCapelozza FilhoLPereira LaurisJRGaribDG. Esthetic evaluation of the facial profile in rehabilitated adults with complete bilateral cleft lip and palate. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2015;73(1):169.e1-169.e6. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2014.09.012
33.
SforzaCFerrarioVF. Three-dimensional analysis of facial morphology: Growth, development and aging of the orolabial region. Ital J Anat Embryol. 2010;115(1-2):141-145.
34.
SforzaCGrandiGBinelliMDolciCDe MenezesMFerrarioVF. Age- and sex-related changes in three-dimensional lip morphology. Forensic Sci Int. 2010;200(1-3):182.e1-182.e7. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2010.04.050
AyoubFSaadehMFayyad-KazanHHaddadR. Stereophotogrammetric analysis of labial morphology in a young adult Middle-Eastern population. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2019;47(2):273-279. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcms.2018.12.001
38.
Al-KhatibARRajionZAMasudiSMHassanRAndersonPJTownsendGC. Stereophotogrammetric analysis of nasolabial morphology among Asian Malays: Influence of age and sex. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2012;49(4):463-471. doi:https://doi.org/10.1597/11-151
HeZJJianXCWuXSGaoXZhouSHZhongXH. Anthropometric measurement and analysis of the external nasal soft tissue in 119 young Han Chinese adults. J Craniofac Surg. 2009;20(5):1347-1351. doi:https://doi.org/10.1097/SCS.0b013e3181ae41cf
