A method for the quantitative and qualitative analysis of the facial soft-tissue profile has been developed, and applied to analyze the pretreatment lateral head films of 240 orthodontic patients aged 8 to 14 years.
Methods:
Patients were subdivided for sex, age, and skeletal class. To standardize for different facial sizes, soft-tissue profiles from nasion to pogonion were traced in polar coordinates without modifications of facial shape, and standardized for an equal skeletal vertical dimension.
Results:
The method allowed a simple and rapid quantitative evaluation of soft-tissue profiles during facial growth. An approximate evaluation of the soft-tissue thickness at nose, lips, and chin was also possible. No particular mathematical knowledge was required at any step of the analysis.
Conclusions:
Facial soft-tissue size and shape were influenced by age and sex, and to a minor extent by skeletal class.
BatscheletE.Circular statistics in biology.London: Academic Press, 1981.
2.
BisharaS.E.HessionT.J.PetersonL.C.Longitudinal soft-tissue profile changes: a study of three analyses.Am J Orthod1985; 88: 209–223.
3.
BittnerC.PancherzH.Facial morphology and malocclusions.Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop1990; 97: 308–315.
4.
BroadbentB.H.Sr.BroadbentB.H.JrGoldenW.H.Bolton standards of dentofacial developmental growth.St. Louis: CV Mosby, 1975.
5.
CoxN.H.Van der LindenFPGM. Facial harmony, Am J Orthod1971; 60: 175–183.
6.
CzarneckiS.T.Nanda RS, Currier GF. Perceptions of a balanced facial profile.Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop1993; 104: 180–187.
7.
FerrarioV.F.SforzaC.D'AddonaA.. ANB skeletal types correlated to facial morphology: an evaluation by the Euclidean distance matrix analysis.Int J Adult Orthod Orthognath Surg1993; 8: 181–190.
8.
FerrarioV.F.Sforza C, Germano D, et al. Head posture and cephalometric analyses: an integrated photographic/radiographic technique.Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop1994a; 106: 257–264.
9.
FerrarioV.F.SforzaC.PoggioC.E.TartagliaG.Facial morphometry of television actresses compared with normal women.J Oral Maxillofac Surg1995; 53: 1008–1014.
10.
FerrarioV.F.Sforza C, Poggio CE, et al. Fourier analysis of cephalometric shapes.Cleft Palate Craniofac J1996; 33: 207–212.
11.
FerrarioV.F.SforzaC.SerrraoG.. Comparison of soft tissue facial morphometry in children with class 1 and class II occlusions.Int J Adult Orthod Orthognath Surg1994b; 9: 187–194.
12.
FineM.B.LavelleC.L.B.Diagnosis of skeletal form on the lateral cephalo-gram with a finite element-based expert system.Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop1992; 101: 318–329.
13.
GenecovJ.S.SinclairP.M., Dechow PC, Development of the nose and soft tissue profile.Angle Orthod1990; 60: 191–198.
14.
HackG.A.de Mol Van OtterlooJ.J.NandaR.Long-term stability and piediction of soft tissue changes after LeFort I surgery, Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop1993; 104: 544–555.
15.
KuylM.H.VerbeeckR.M.H.Dermaut LR. The integumental profile: a reflection of the underlying skeletal configuration?Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop1994; 106: 597–604.
16.
LebretL.M.L.The mesh diagram, a guide to its use in clinical orthodontics. In: JacobsonA.CanfieldP.W. eds. Introduction to radiographic cephalometry.Philadelphia: Lea & Febiger. 1985: 90–106.
LestrelP.E.Some approaches toward the mathematical modeling of the craniofacial complex.J Craniofac Genet Dev Biol1989; 9: 77–91.
19.
LundströmA.ForsbergC-MPeckS.McWilliamJ.A proportional analysis of the soft tissue facial profile in young adults with normal occlusion.Angle Orthod1992; 62: 127–133.
20.
MauchampO.SassouniV.Growth and prediction of the skeletal and soft-tissue profiles.Am J Orthod1973; 64: 83–94.
21.
MirallesR.HeviaR.ContrerasL.. Patterns of electromyographic activity in subjects with different skeletal facial types.Angle Orthod1991; 61: 277–283.
22.
MoorreesC.F.A.LebretL.The mesh diagram and cephalometrics.Angle Orthod1962; 32: 214–231.
23.
MoorreesC.F.A.Van VenrooijM.E.LebretL.M.L.. New norms for the mesh diagram analysis.Am J Orthod1976; 69: 57–71.
24.
NandaR.S.MengH.KapilaS.GoorhuisJ.Growth changes in the soft tissue facial profile.Angle Orthod1990; 60: 177–190.
25.
PeckS.PeckL.KataiaM.Skeletal asymmetry in esthetically pleasing faces.Angle Orthod1991; 61: 43–48.
RomaniK.L.AgahiF.NandaR.ZernikJ.H.Evaluation of horizontal and vertical differences in facial profiles by orthodontist and lay people.Angle Orthod1993; 63: 175–182.
28.
ScheidemanG.B.BellW.H.LeganH.L.. Cephalometric analysis of dentofacial normals.Am J Orthod1980; 78: 404–420.
29.
SkinaziG.L.S.LindauerS.J.IsaacsonR.J.Chin, nose, and lips. Normal ratios in young men and women.Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop1994; 106: 518–523.
30.
SpradleyF.L.JacobsJ.D.CroweD.P.Assessment of the anteroposterior soft-tissue contour of the lower facial third in the ideal young adult.Am J Orthod1981; 79: 316–325.
31.
YangS.D.SuhrC.H., F-H to AB plane angle (FABA) for assessment of anteroposterior jaw relationships.Angle Orthod1993; 665: 223–232.
32.
ZylinskiC.G.NandaR.S.KapilaS.Analysis of soft tissue facial profile in white males.Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop1992; 101: 514–518.
