Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

LIVE: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)
Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
BMC Oral Health
Published in: BMC Oral Health 1/2023

Open Access 01-12-2023 | Research

Perceptual difference of smile aesthetics between 2-dimensional photographs and 3-dimensional dentofacial images: a cross-sectional study

Authors: Zhuoxing Xiao, Gui Chen, Yijiao Zhao, Yong Wang, Yan Gu

Published in: BMC Oral Health | Issue 1/2023

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

The aim of this study was to compare the perceptual difference of smile aesthetics between 2D photographs and 3D dentofacial images as perceived by orthodontists and graduate students.

Methods

Forty-eight subjects finished orthodontic treatment were recruited with 2D photographs of frontal, oblique and lateral views as well as 3D dentofacial images. Twelve senior orthodontists and 13 postgraduate students were asked to rate the 2D and 3D smile simulations based on visual analog scale (VAS) and to vote for smile features that affect the attractiveness of smile. At the end, they completed a questionnaire about their views on different smile simulations. Wilcoxon signed-rank, Bland–Altman analysis, and multiple linear regression were used to compare the ratings and votes of smile perception between raters and between records.

Results

Orthodontists and postgraduate students rated smile consistently with 2D photographs, while orthodontists tended to give a higher rate for unattractive smiles and a lower rate for attractive smiles with 3D dentofacial images. The 3D dentofacial images were rated significantly lower than 2D photographs and the voting of most of the smile features showed significant negative main effect on VAS scores, while the effect of demographic characteristics of raters, voting on visible width of upper dentition and buccal corridor was not significant. In addition, a significant negative main effect of commissure and facial profile was found on the rating discrepancy between 2D and 3D images.

Conclusions

Senior orthodontists tend to perceived 3D images more conservatively in smile evaluation. 3D dentofacial images were rated lower than 2D photographs and most of the smile features affect the aesthetic perception of smile. The perceptual difference of commissure and facial profile contributed to the lower ratings in 3D dentofacial images.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
Mack MR. Perspective of facial esthetics in dental treatment planning. J Prosthet Dent. 1996;75(2):169–76.CrossRefPubMed
2.
Sarver DM. Interactions of hard tissues, soft tissues, and growth over time, and their impact on orthodontic diagnosis and treatment planning. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 2015;148(3):380–6.CrossRef
3.
Melsen B. The role of orthodontics in the regeneration of the degenerated dentition. J Oral Rehabil. 2016;43(3):226–37.CrossRefPubMed
4.
Lv L, He W, Ye H, Cheung K, Tang L, Wang S, You L, Xun C, Zhou Y. Interdisciplinary 3D digital treatment simulation before complex esthetic rehabilitation of orthodontic, orthognathic and prosthetic treatment: workflow establishment and primary evaluation. BMC Oral Health. 2022;22(1):34.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
5.
Patusco V, Carvalho CK, Lenza MA, Faber J. Smile prevails over other facial components of male facial esthetics. J Am Dent Assoc. 2018;149(8):680–7.CrossRefPubMed
6.
Tole N, Lajnert V, Kovacevic Pavicic D, Spalj S. Gender, age, and psychosocial context of the perception of facial esthetics. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2014;26(2):119–30.CrossRefPubMed
7.
Alhammadi MS, Halboub E, Al-Mashraqi AA, Al-Homoud M, Wafi S, Zakari A, Mashali W. Perception of facial, dental, and smile esthetics by dental students. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2018;30(5):415–26.CrossRefPubMed
8.
Pinzan-Vercelino CRM, Costa ACS, Ferreira MC, Bramante FS, Fialho MPN, Gurgel JA. Comparison of gingival display in smile attractiveness among restorative dentists, orthodontists, prosthodontists, periodontists, and laypeople. J Prosthet Dent. 2020;123(2):314–21.CrossRefPubMed
9.
Sun J, Lin YC, Lee JD, Lee SJ. Effect of increasing occlusal vertical dimension on lower facial form and perceived facial esthetics: a digital evaluation. J Prosthet Dent. 2021;126(4):546–52.CrossRefPubMed
10.
Ellakany P, Fouda SM, Alghamdi M, Bakhurji E. Factors affecting dental self-confidence and satisfaction with dental appearance among adolescents in Saudi Arabia: a cross sectional study. BMC Oral Health. 2021;21(1):149.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
11.
Sarver DM. The importance of incisor positioning in the esthetic smile: the smile arc. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2001;120(2):98–111.CrossRefPubMed
12.
Sarver DM, Ackerman MB. Dynamic smile visualization and quantification: part 1. Evolution of the concept and dynamic records for smile capture. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 2003;124(1):4–12.CrossRef
13.
Kim SH, Hwang S, Hong YJ, Kim JJ, Kim KH, Chung CJ. Visual attention during the evaluation of facial attractiveness is influenced by facial angles and smile. Angle Orthod. 2018;88(3):329–37.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
14.
Pasukdee P, Cheng JH, Chen DS. Smile preferences of orthodontists, general dentists, patients, and the general public in three-quarter and lateral views. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 2021;159(4):e311–20.CrossRef
15.
Cheng JHC, Luechapanichkul MJ, Lee TYH. The relationship between dentofacial morphology and smile characteristics in lateral and oblique views. J Dent Sci. 2021;16(1):37–44.CrossRefPubMed
16.
Ceinos R, Lupi L, Tellier A, Bertrand MF. Three-dimensional stereophotogrammetric analysis of 50 smiles: a study of dento-facial proportions. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2017;29(6):416–23.CrossRefPubMed
17.
Demir R, Baysal A. Three-dimensional evaluation of smile characteristics in subjects with increased vertical facial dimensions. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 2020;157(6):773–82.CrossRef
18.
Li H, Cao T, Zhou H, Hou Y. Lip position analysis of young women with different skeletal patterns during posed smiling using 3-dimensional stereophotogrammetry. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 2019;155(1):64–70.CrossRef
19.
Dindaroglu F, Duran GS, Gorgulu S, Yetkiner E. Social smile reproducibility using 3-D stereophotogrammetry and reverse engineering technology. Angle Orthod. 2016;86(3):448–55.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
20.
Ma L, Xu T, Lin J. Validation of a three-dimensional facial scanning system based on structured light techniques. Comput Methods Programs Biomed. 2009;94(3):290–8.CrossRefPubMed
21.
Lee H, Fehmer V, Kwon KR, Burkhardt F, Pae A, Sailer I. Virtual diagnostics and guided tooth preparation for the minimally invasive rehabilitation of a patient with extensive tooth wear: a validation of a digital workflow. J Prosthet Dent. 2020;123(1):20–6.CrossRefPubMed
22.
Revilla-Leon M, Besne-Torre A, Sanchez-Rubio JL, Fabrega JJ, Ozcan M. Digital tools and 3D printing technologies integrated into the workflow of restorative treatment: a clinical report. J Prosthet Dent. 2019;121(1):3–8.CrossRefPubMed
23.
Revilla-Leon M, Raney L, Piedra-Cascon W, Barrington J, Zandinejad A, Ozcan M. Digital workflow for an esthetic rehabilitation using a facial and intraoral scanner and an additive manufactured silicone index: a dental technique. J Prosthet Dent. 2020;123(4):564–70.CrossRefPubMed
24.
Rosati R, De Menezes M, Rossetti A, Sforza C, Ferrario VF. Digital dental cast placement in 3-dimensional, full-face reconstruction: a technical evaluation. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 2010;138(1):84–8.CrossRef
25.
Xiao Z, Liu Z, Gu Y. Integration of digital maxillary dental casts with 3D facial images in orthodontic patients. Angle Orthod. 2020;90(3):397–404.CrossRefPubMed
26.
Revilla-Leon M, Campbell HE, Meyer MJ, Umorin M, Sones A, Zandinejad A. Esthetic dental perception comparisons between 2D- and 3D-simulated dental discrepancies. J Prosthet Dent. 2020;124(6):763–73.CrossRefPubMed
27.
Revilla-Leon M, Ashby MT, Meyer MJ, Umorin M, Barrington JJ, Zandinejad A. Layperson and dental professional perception when evaluating their own virtually 2D or 3D simulated esthetic discrepancies. J Prosthodont. 2020;29(6):466–71.CrossRefPubMed
28.
Revilla-Leon M, Ashby MT, Meyer MJ, Zandinejad A, Umorin M. Self-perception and self-representation preference between 2-dimensional and 3-dimensional facial reconstructions among dentists, dental students, and laypersons. J Prosthet Dent. 2022;127(6):911–7.CrossRefPubMed
29.
McGraw KO, Wong SP. Forming inferences about some intraclass correlation coefficients. Psychol Methods. 1996;1(1):30–46.CrossRef
30.
Cai Y, Du W, Lin F, Ye S, Ye Y. Agreement of young adults and orthodontists on dental aesthetics & influencing factors of self-perceived aesthetics. BMC Oral Health. 2018;18(1):113.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
31.
Ye H, Wang KP, Liu Y, Liu Y, Zhou Y. Four-dimensional digital prediction of the esthetic outcome and digital implementation for rehabilitation in the esthetic zone. J Prosthet Dent. 2020;123(4):557–63.CrossRefPubMed
32.
Fu X, Yang J, Luo J, Zhang Y. Three-dimensional facial esthetics-driven computer-assisted osteotomy and implant placement for immediate restoration of a failing dentition with a protruded maxilla. J Prosthet Dent. 2022;127(3):392–7.CrossRefPubMed
33.
Sawyer AR, See M, Nduka C. Quantitative analysis of normal smile with 3D stereophotogrammetry - an aid to facial reanimation. J Plast Reconstr Aes. 2010;63(1):65–72.CrossRef
34.
Jaffer H, Ichesco E, Gerstner GE. Kinematic analysis of a Duchenne smile. Arch Oral Biol. 2016;64:11–8.CrossRefPubMed
35.
Huang P, Cai B, Zhou C, Wang W, Wang X, Gao D, Bao B. Contribution of the mandible position to the facial profile perception of a female facial profile: an eye-tracking study. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 2019;156(5):641–52.CrossRef
36.
Volpato GH, de Almeida-Pedrin RR, Oltramari PVP, Freire Fernandes TM, de Almeida MR, de Castro Ferreira Conti AC. Self-perception of facial esthetics by patients with different profiles compared with assessments of orthodontists and lay people. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 2020;158(6):840–8.CrossRef
37.
Robinson MW, Baiungo J. Facial rehabilitation: evaluation and treatment strategies for the patient with facial palsy. Otolaryngol Clin N Am. 2018;51(6):1151–67.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Perceptual difference of smile aesthetics between 2-dimensional photographs and 3-dimensional dentofacial images: a cross-sectional study
Authors
Zhuoxing Xiao
Gui Chen
Yijiao Zhao
Yong Wang
Yan Gu
Publication date
01-12-2023
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Oral Health / Issue 1/2023
Electronic ISSN: 1472-6831
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-023-02798-2

Other articles of this Issue 1/2023

BMC Oral Health 1/2023 Go to the issue

Research

In vitro evaluation of filling material removal and apical debris extrusion after retreatment using Reciproc blue, Hyflex EDM and ProTaper retreatment files

Research

The antimicrobial efficacy of nanographene oxide and double antibiotic paste per se and in combination: part II

Research

Lip and tongue strength associated with chewing patterns in aging population

Research

Knowledge assessment on cleft lip and palate among recently graduated dentists: a cross-sectional study

Research

Potential of ultra-high-resolution CT in detecting osseous changes of temporomandibular joint: experiences in temporomandibular disorders

Research

A comparative assessment of color stability among various commercial resin composites