Top

Journal of Orofacial Orthopedics / Fortschritte der Kieferorthopädie

Published in:

01-01-2022 | Original Article

Influence of facial components in class III malocclusion esthetic perception of orthodontists, patients, and laypersons

Authors: Rosamaria Fastuca, DDS, MS, Tommaso Beccarini, DDS, MS, Ornella Rossi, DDS, Piero Antonio Zecca, DDS, MS, Alberto Caprioglio, DDS, MS

Published in: Journal of Orofacial Orthopedics / Fortschritte der Kieferorthopädie | Issue 1/2022

Abstract

Purpose

The aim of the present study was to investigate the influence of different facial components (face length, lip volume, nose size, and cheekbone contour) on the perception of facial attractiveness of patients with Angle class III malocclusion in different categories of responders (orthodontists, laypersons, patients) with two-dimensional (2D) and three-dimensional (3D) simulations.

Methods

An ideal standard 3D face was manipulated to create a class III facial malocclusion. Four facial components were modified (face length, lip volume, nose size and cheekbone contour) and the resulting simulations were used to obtain 2D figures and 3D videos, which were evaluated in a survey by orthodontists, patients, and laypersons.

Results

No significant differences were detected between the 2D figures and 3D video simulations. Good correspondence was shown between the three categories of responders for the most and the least attractive faces. Smaller lips and bigger nose, regardless to the vertical dimension (short or long face), were found to be the least attractive features with agreement of all respondents.

Conclusion

Regarding class III facial attractiveness perception, the sum of all facial features and not the alteration of a single component alone seems to play a key role in the perception of facial attractiveness. The 2D or 3D perspective did not play a significant role in perception and the analyzed categories of responders did not show significant differences when perceiving facial attractiveness of the utilized simulations.

Arnett GW, Bergman RT (1993) Facial keys to orthodontic diagnosis and treatment planning—Part II. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 103:395–411CrossRef

Prahl-Andersen B, Boersma H, Van der Linden FP, Moore AW (1979) Perceptions of dentofacial morphology by laypersons, general dentists, and orthodontists. J Am Dent Assoc 98:209–212CrossRef

Elnagar MH, Elshourbagy E, Ghobashy S, Khedr M, Kusnoto B, Evans CA (2017) Three-dimensional assessment of soft tissue changes associated with bone-anchored maxillary protraction protocols. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 152:336–347CrossRef

Hershey HG, Smith LH (1974) Soft-tissue profile change associated with surgical correction of the prognathic mandible. Am J Orthod 65:483–502CrossRef

Bowker WD, Howard VM (1959) A metric analysis of the facial profile. Angle Orthod 29:149–160

De Lir AL, de Moura WL, Oliveira Ruellas AC, Gomes Souza MM, Nojima LI (2013) Long-term skeletal and profile stability after surgical-orthodontic treatment of Class II and Class III malocclusion. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 41:296–302CrossRef

Nguyen T, Cevidanes L, Cornelis MA, Heymann G, de Paula LK, De Clerck H (2011) Three-dimensional assessment of maxillary changes associated with bone anchored maxillary protraction. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 140:790–798CrossRef

Johnson EK, Fields HW Jr, Beck FM, Firestone AR, Rosenstiel SF (2017) Role of facial attractiveness in patients with slight-to-borderline treatment need according to the Aesthetic Component of the Index of Orthodontic Treatment Need as judged by eye tracking. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 151(2):297–310CrossRef

Fastuca R, Lorusso P, Lagravère MO, Michelotti A, Portelli M, Zecca PA, D’ Antò V, Militi A, Nucera R, Caprioglio A (2017) Digital evaluation of nasal changes induced by rapid maxillary expansion with different anchorage and appliance design. BMC Oral Health 17:113CrossRef

10.

Bin Ayub F, Agarwal A, Kumar RR, Yadav A, Attri S (2019) Perception of Nasal esthetics as affecting Facial esthetics. J Dent Med Sci 18:52–60

11.

Czarnecki ST, Nanda RS, Currier GF (1993) Perceptions of a balanced facial profile. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 104:180–187CrossRef

12.

Sassouni V, Nanda S (1964) Analysis of dentofacial vertical proportions. Am J Orthod 50:801–823CrossRef

13.

Fastuca R, Campobasso A, Zecca PA, Caprioglio A (2018) 3D facial soft tissue changes after rapid maxillary expansion on primary teeth: a randomized clinical trial. Orthod Craniofac Res 21(3). https://doi.org/10.1111/ocr.12229CrossRefPubMed

14.

Abu Arqoub SH, Al-Khateeb SN (2001) Perception of facial profile attractiveness of different antero-posterior and vertical proportions. Eur J Orthod 33:103–111CrossRef

15.

Todd SA, Hammond P, Hutton T, Cochrane S, Cunningham S (2005) Perceptions of facial aesthetics in two and three dimensions. Clinical Trial Eur J Orthod 27:363–369CrossRef

16.

Johnston DJ, Hunt O, Johnston C, Burden D, Stevenson M, Hepper P (2005) The influence of lower face vertical proportion on facial attractiveness. Eur J Orthod 27:349–354CrossRef

17.

Yin L, Jiang M, Chen W, Smales RJ, Wang Q, Tangf L (2014) Differences in facial profile and dental esthetic perceptions between young adults and orthodontists. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 145:750–756CrossRef

18.

Fenga J, Yub H, Yinc Y, Yand Y, Wangd Z, Baie D, Hanf X (2019) Esthetic evaluation of facial cheek volume: a study using 3D stereophotogrammetry. Angle Orthod 89:129–137CrossRef

19.

Yua X, Liub B, Peic Y, Xud T (2014) Evaluation of facial attractiveness for patients with malocclusion. A machine-learning technique employing Procrustes. Angle Orthod 84:410–416CrossRef

20.

De Smit A, Dermaut L (1984) Soft-tissue profile preference. Am J Orthod 86:67–73CrossRef

21.

Fink M, Hirschfelder U, Hirschinger V, Schmid M, Spitzl C, Detterbeck A, Hofmann E (2017) Assessment of facial soft-tissue profiles based on lateral photographs versus three-dimensional face scans. J Orofac Orthop 78:70–76CrossRef

22.

Tigue CC, Pisanski K, O’Connor JJM, Fraccaro PJ, Feinberg DR (2012) Men’s judgments of women’s facial attractiveness from two- and three-dimensional images are similar. J Vis 12:1–7CrossRef

23.

Třebický V, Fialová J, Stella D, Štěrbová Z, Kleisner K, Havlíček J (2018) 360 degrees of facial perception: congruence in perception of frontal portrait, profile, and rotation photographs. Front Psychol 7:2405CrossRef

24.

Nanda RS, Ghosh J, Bazakidou E (1996) Three-dimensional facial analysis using a video imaging system. Angle Orthod 66:181–188PubMed

25.

Modarai F, Donaldson JC, Naini FB (2013) The influence of lower lip position on the perceived attractiveness of chin prominence. Angle Orthod 83:795–800CrossRef

26.

Sforza C, Lainob A, D’Alessio R, Grandi G, Tartaglia GM, Ferruccio Ferrario V (2008) Soft-tissue facial characteristics of attractive and normal adolescent boys and girls. Angle Orthod 78:799–807CrossRef

27.

Zecca PA, Fastuca R, Beretta M, Caprioglio A, Macchi A (2016) Diagnosis correlation assessment between three-dimensional facial soft tissue scan and lateral cephalometric radiography in orthodontic. Int J Dent. https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/1473918CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

28.

Rosa M, Olimpo A, Fastuca R, Caprioglio A (2013) Perceptions of dental professionals and laypeople to altered dental esthetics in cases with congenitally missing maxillary lateral incisors. Prog Orthod 1:14–34

29.

Cochrane SM, Cunningham SJ, Hunt NP (1999) A comparison of the perception of facial profile by the general public and 3 groups of clinicians. Int J Adult Orthod Orthognath Surg 14:291–295

30.

Fabré M, Mossaz C, Christou P, Kiliaridis S (2009) Orthodontists’ and laypersons’ aesthetic assessment of Class III subjects referred for orthognathic surgery. Eur J Orthod 31:443–448CrossRef

Title: Influence of facial components in class III malocclusion esthetic perception of orthodontists, patients, and laypersons
Authors: Rosamaria Fastuca, DDS, MS
Tommaso Beccarini, DDS, MS
Ornella Rossi, DDS
Piero Antonio Zecca, DDS, MS
Alberto Caprioglio, DDS, MS
Publication date: 01-01-2022
Publisher: Springer Medizin
Published in: Journal of Orofacial Orthopedics / Fortschritte der Kieferorthopädie / Issue 1/2022
Print ISSN: 1434-5293
Electronic ISSN: 1615-6714
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00056-021-00287-1

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Influence of facial components in class III malocclusion esthetic perception of orthodontists, patients, and laypersons

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusion

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 1/2022

Correction to: Effects of sodium chloride on the gene expression profile of periodontal ligament fibroblasts during tensile strain

Effects of Danggui-Shaoyao-San on depression- and anxiety-like behaviors of rats induced by experimental tooth movement

Elution study of acrylic monomers from orthodontic materials using high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC)

Comparative analysis of passive play and torque expression in self-ligating and traditional lingual brackets

Mitteilungen der DGKFO

Friction behavior of the wire material Gummetal®