Journal of Isfahan Dental School

Correlation Assessment of the Results of Soft and Hard Tissue Analysis to Determine Facial Convexity and Facial Angle in Patients Referring to Orthodontic Clinics of Bandar Abbas

Document Type : مقاله‌های پژوهشی

Authors

1 Student Research Committee, School of Dentistry, Hormozgan University of Medical Sciences, Bandarabbas, Iran.

2 Dental Research Center, Department of Orthdontics, School of Dentistry, Hormozgan University of Medical Sciences, Bandarabbas, Iran.

3 Post Graduate Student, Department of Restorative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran.

Abstract

Introduction: Since the harmony and the balance of the face are the result of the interaction between the hard tissue and soft tissues, it is essential to understand the relationship between these two tissues in the treatment planning. The aim of the present study was to investigate the facial angles and face convex angle in the soft tissue and its association with hard tissues in patients referred to Bandar Abbas Faculty of Dentistry.
Materials & Methods: In this cross-sectional study 75 lateral cephalograms were evaluated. The subjects were 18-25 years of age and all had a complete permanent dentition (except for the third molars) without a history of facial traumas, orthognathic surgery, orthodontic treatment and congenital anomalies. Facial angle and facial convexity angle of hard and soft tissues, chin soft tissue thickness and upper lip thickness were determined. Data were analyzed with SPSS 22, Mann-Whitney test was used for comparison of male and female subjects. Pearson’s correlation coefficient was used for the analysis of correlations (p value < 0.05).
Results: There was a significant correlation between soft tissue facial angle and hard tissue facial angle (r = 0.9, p value < 0.05) and between soft tissue facial convexity and hard tissue convexity angle (r = 0.7, p value < 0.05). The mean lip thicknesses in male and female subjects were 14.58 ± 2.33 and 12.20 ± 1.74 mm, respectively. There was a significant correlation between chin soft tissue thickness and gender (p value < 0.05). The mean thickness of chin soft tissue in males (12.50 ± 2.32) was higher than that in females (10.84 ± 2.32).
Conclusion: Since there was a significant correlation between soft tissue facial angle and convexity and soft tissue facial angle and convexity, we can use soft tissues to gain knowledge about hard tissues.
Key words: Hard tissues, Orthodontics, Soft tissues.

1. Graber LW, Vanarsdall RL, Vig KWL. Orthodontics. 5th ed. St Louis: Mosby; 2011.
2. Rakosi T. An atlas and manual of cephalometric radiography. Philadelphia, PA: Lea & Febiger; 1982.
3. Bowman SJ. Facial esthetics in orthodontics. J Am Dent Assoc 1999; 130(8): 1173-81.
4. Kouli A, Papagiannis A, Konstantoni N, Halazonetis DJ, Konstantonis D. A geometric morphometric evaluation of hard and soft tissue profile changes in borderline extraction versus non-extraction patients. Eur J Orthod 2018. [Epub ahead of print]
5. Lee YJ, Park JT, Cha JY. Perioral soft tissue evaluation of skeletal Class II Division 1: A lateral cephalometric study. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2015; 148(3): 405-13.
6. Burstone CJ. Lip posture and its significance in treatment planning. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1967; 53(4): 262-84.
7. Jacobson A, Jacobson RL. Radiographic cephalometry: from basics to 3-D imaging. 2nd ed. Quintessence Pub Co; 2006. p. 65-216.
8. McNamara L, McNamara JA Jr, Ackerman MB, Baccetti T. Hard-and soft-tissue contributions to the esthetics of the posed smile in growing patients seeking orthodontic treatment. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2008; 133(4): 491-9.
9. Perović T, Blažej Z. Male and female characteristics of facial soft tissue thickness in different orthodontic malocclusions evaluated by cephalometric radiography. Med Sci Monit 2018; 24: 3415-24.
10. Burstone CJ. The integumental profile. Am J Orthod 1958; 44(1): 1-25.
11. Al-TakiAA, Oguz F, Abuhijleh. E. Facial soft tissue values in Persian adults with normal occlusion and well-balanced faces. Angle Orthod 2009; 79(3): 491-4.
12. de Greef S, Claes P, Vandermeulen D, Mollemans W, Suetens P, Willems G. Large-scale in-vivo Caucasian facial soft tissue thickness database for craniofacial reconstruction. Forensic Sci Int 2006; 159(Suppl 1): S126-S146.
13. Utsuno H, Kageyama T, Uchida K, Yoshino M, Miyazawa H, Inoue K. Facial soft tissue thickness in Japanese children. Forensic Sci Int 2010; 199(1-3): 109.e1-6.
14. Domaracki M, Stephan CN. Facial soft tissue thicknesses in Australian adult cadavers. J Forensic Sci 2006; 51(1): 5-10.
15. Genecov JS, Sinclair PM, Dechow PC. Development of the nose and soft tissue profile. Angle Orthod 1990; 60(3): 191-8.
16. Ramezanzadeh BA, Karimi MH, Tahmasbi S. Cephalometric evaluation of facial soft tissue facial profile for 16-21 years old students of Kerman with normal occlusion. J Isfahan Dent Sch 2009: 5(2): 107-12. [In Persian].
17. Holdaway RA. A soft-tissue cephalometric analysis and its use in orthodontic treatment planning. Part I. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1983; 84(1): 1-28.
18. Basciftci FA, Uysal T, Buyukerkmen A. Determination of Holdaway soft tissue norms in Anatolian Turkish adults. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2003; 123(4): 395-400.
Journal of Isfahan Dental School
Volume 15, Issue 4 - Serial Number 4
December 2019
Pages 443-450