SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Acta Odontologica Turcica / 2020 / Cilt: 37 - Sayı: 3

Evaluation of pronasale, nasolabial and paranasal asymmetries in patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate using three-dimensional imaging

Tek taraflı dudak damak yarıklı hastalarda üç boyutlu görüntüleme ile nazolabial asimetrinin değerlendirilmesi

Selin ALPAĞAN ÖZDEMİR
Elçin ESENLİK
Pages
58–63
Publication Date
2020-09-01
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Asymmetrical appearance was prominent on alar base and pronasale regions.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objective: Facial symmetry is an important component of a successful treatment of patients with cleft lip and palate.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The aim of this retrospective study was to examine the pronasale, nasolabial, and paranasal region asymmetries in patients with nonsyndromic unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP) using three-dimensional (3D) facial imaging.Materials and Method: The study group consisted of 29 patients with complete UCLP aged 8–29 years. 3D stereophotogrammetric soft tissue recordings of all patients were analyzed.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Asymmetrical appearance was prominent on alar base and pronasale regions.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Damak yarığı · dudak yarığı · fasiyal asimetri

Abstract

Objective: Facial symmetry is an important component of a successful treatment of patients with cleft lip and palate. The aim of this retrospective study was to examine the pronasale, nasolabial, and paranasal region asymmetries in patients with nonsyndromic unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP) using three-dimensional (3D) facial imaging.Materials and Method: The study group consisted of 29 patients with complete UCLP aged 8–29 years. 3D stereophotogrammetric soft tissue recordings of all patients were analyzed. Measurements were performed on the cleft and noncleft side and compared with each other by the paired t-test.Results: Statistically significant differences were observed between the cleft and noncleft sides. Alar contour-Pronasale distance was longer on the cleft side than on the noncleft side, with the difference between them being statistically significant (p<0.05). The Subnasale-Pronasale / Alar contour-Pronasale ratio was also significantly lower on the cleft side than on the noncleft side (p<0.05).Conclusion: Patients with UCLP did not present significant asymmetries regarding Cheek and Buccal contours and Chelion-Subnasale and Christa Philtry-Subnasale heights. Asymmetrical appearance was prominent on alar base and pronasale regions.

Özet

Amaç: Dudak damak yarıklı hastaların tedavi başarısında fasiyal asimetri önemli bir komponenttir. Bu retrospektif çalışmanın amacı, nonsendromik tek taraflı dudak damak yarıklı hastalarda üç boyutlu yüz görüntüleme kullanılarak pronazal, nazolabial ve paranazal bölge asimetrilerinin değerlendirmektir.Gereç ve Yöntem: Çalışma grubu tek taraflı total dudak damak yarığı bulunan, yaşları 8-29 yıl arasında olan 29 hastadan oluşmaktadır. Tüm hastaların 3 boyutlu stereofotografik yumuşak doku görüntüleri analiz edildi. Ölçümler yarık olan ve olmayan taraflar için yapılarak birbirleriyle karşılaştırıldı. Yarıklı ve yarıksız taraf ölçüm farklılıklarının tespiti için eşleştirilmiş t testi kullanıldı.Bulgular: Yarıklı ve yarıksız taraf ölçümlerinde istatistiksel olarak önemli farklılıklar gözlendi. Alar kontur-Pronazal mesafesi, yarık olan tarafta yarık olmayan tarafa göre istatistiksel olarak önemli düzeyde daha uzun bulundu (p<0.05). Subnazal-Pronazal/Alar kontur-Pronazal oranı, yarık olan tarafta yarık olmayan tarafa göre istatistiksel olarak önemli ölçüde düşük bulundu (p<0.05).Sonuç: Tek taraflı total dudak damak yarıklı hastalarda yanak ve bukkal kontürlerinde ve dudak köşesi-Subnazal ile Krista filtri -Subnazal ölçümlerinde önemli bir asimetri göstermedi. Asimetrik görüntü, alar taban ve pronazale bölgelerinde belirgindi.

🔖

Cite This Article

ÖZDEMİR, S. A., ESENLİK, E. (2020). Evaluation of pronasale, nasolabial and paranasal asymmetries in patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate using three-dimensional imaging. Acta Odontologica Turcica, Cilt: 37 - Sayı: 3, 58–63. https://ajindex.com/articles/265238

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (14)

  1. Meyer-Marcotty P, Kochel J, Boehm H, Linz C, Klammert U, Stellzig-Eisenhauer A. Face perception in patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate and patients with severe Class III malocclusion compared to controls. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 2011;39:158-63. Rhodes G. The evolutionary psychology of facial beauty. Annu Rev Psychol 2006;57:199-226.
  2. Farkas LG, Cheung G. Facial asymmetry in healthy North American Caucasians: an anthropometrical study. Angle Orthod 1981;51:70-7.
  3. Bugaighis I, Mattick C, Tiddeman B, Hobson R. 3D facial morphometry in children with oral clefts. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 2014;51:452-61.
  4. Bernstein NR, Kapp K. Adolescents with cleft palate: body-image and psychosocial problems. Psychosomatics 1981;22:697-700.
  5. Meyer-Marcotty P, Alpers GW, Gerdes AB, Stellzig-Eisenhauer A. Impact of facial asymmetry in visual perception: a 3-dimensional data analysis. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 2010;137:161-8.
  6. Bugaighis I, Mattick C, Tiddeman B, Hobson R. 3D asymmetry of operated children with oral clefts. Orthod Craniofac Res 2014;17:27-37.
  7. Zreaqat M, Hassan R, Halim A. Facial dimensions of Malay children with repaired unilateral cleft lip and palate: a three dimensional analysis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2012;41:783-8.
  8. Maull DJ, Grayson BH, Cutting CB, Brecht LL, Bookstein FL, Khorrambadi D, et al. Long-term effects of nasoalveolar molding on three-dimensional nasal shape in unilateral clefts. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 1999;36:391-7.
  9. Edler R, Rahim MA, Wertheim D, Greenhill D. The use of facial anthropometrics in aesthetic assessment. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 2010;47:48-57.
  10. Scheib JE, Gangestad SW, Thornhill R. Facial attractiveness, symmetry and cues of good genes. Proc Biol Sci 1999;266:1913-7.
  11. Desmedt DJ, Maal TJ, Kuijpers MA, Bronkhorst EM, Kuijpers-Jagtman AM, Fudalej PS. Nasolabial symmetry and esthetics in cleft lip and palate: analysis of 3D facial images. Clin Oral Investig 2015;19:1833-42.
  12. Pietruski P, Majak M, Pawlowska E, Skiba A, Antoszewski B. 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;45:505-14.
  13. Ras F, Habets LL, Van Ginkel FC, Prahl-Andersen B. Three-dimensional evaluation of facial asymmetry in cleft lip and palate. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 1994;31:116-21.
  14. Ishiguro K, Krogman W, Mazaheri