Evaluation of profile aesthetics of skeletal Class Ⅱ patients with different treatment methods

doi:10.19439/j.sjos.2017.04.013

Abstract

Abstract: To study the aesthetic appearance of skeletal Class Ⅱ patients with maxillary protrusion and mandibular retrusion treated with different methods. METHODS: The facial profile photographs and lateral cephalometric radiographs of a Chinese woman suffering from skeletal Class Ⅱ with maxillary protrusion and mandibular retrusion was digitized.The digital images were modified to obtain orthodontic compensatory treatment, genioplasty with different advancement ranges and orthognathic treatment comprising 6 profiles by Photoshop software,orthodontic professionals and non-professionals were chosen to score the pictures. Post hoc tests were done with ANONA and the Student Keuls method to analyze the data Using SPSS22.0 software package. RESULTS: The profile with the highest score was the picture treated by orthognathic and orthodontic treatment. The profile with genioplasty (advancement of 4 mm) took the second place. When the advancement distance of genioplasty was 8 mm, the score was under the score of orthodontic compensatory treatment profile. CONCLUSIONS: Orthognathic-orthodontic treatment of skeletal Class Ⅱ is still the best treatment option to improve facial aesthetics. Genioplasty, as a adjuvant treatment, improves the appearance based on compensatory orthodontic treatment to some extent, but not comparable to orthognathic-orthodontic treatment.

Key words: Skeletal Class Ⅱ, malocclusion, Genoplasty, Orthognathic-orthodontic treatment, Aesthetic evaluation

CLC Number:

R783.5

YANG Jing-yun, HE Chang-ping, ZHANG Yi, HUANG Qian-qian, XIA Xi, WANG Hua-qiao. Evaluation of profile aesthetics of skeletal Class Ⅱ patients with different treatment methods[J]. Shanghai Journal of Stomatology, 2017, 26(4): 414-418.

References

[1] 傅民魁. 口腔正畸学[J]. 中国医学文摘·口腔医学, 2009, 24(1): 39-46.
[2] Sarver DM, Proffit WR, Ackerman JL. Diagnosis and treatment planning[C]//Orthodontics. Current principals and treatment [M]. St Louis, MO: Mosby, 1994.
[3] Kinzinger G, Frye L, Diedrich P. Class Ⅱ treatment in adults: comparing camouflage orthodontics, dentofacial orthopedics and orthognathic surgery-a cephalometric study to evaluate various therapeutic effects [J]. J Orofac Orthop, 2009, 70(1): 63-91.
[4] Tucker MR. Orthognathic surgery versus orthodontic camouflage in the treatment of mandibular deficiency[J]. J Oral Maxillofac Surg, 1995, 53(5): 572-578.
[5] Joss CU, Vassalli IM. Stability after bilateral sagittal split osteotomy setback surgery with rigid internal fixation: a systematic review [J]. J Oral Maxillofac Surg, 2008, 66(8): 1634-43.
[6] 沈映勋, 张策, 曹德君. 颏成形术发展及现况 [J]. 组织工程与重建外科, 2015, 11 (2): 116-119.
[7] 蓝顺清, 胡兴宇, 李朝明, 等. 四川正常成人X线头影测量研究Ⅱ [J]. 局解手术学杂志, 2001, 10(3): 258-260.
[8] 何昌平, 邓锋, 王华桥, 等. 不同切牙定位方式对骨性Ⅱ类患者审美评价的影响 [J]. 口腔医学研究, 2016, 32(5): 497-501.
[9] Rosen HM. Aesthetic guidelines in genioplasty: the role of facial disproportion [J]. Plast Reconstr Surg, 1995, 95(3): 463-469.
[10] Turkkahraman H, Gokalp H. Facial profile preferences among various layers of Turkish population[J]. Angle Orthod, 2004, 74(5): 640-647.
[11] Andrews LF. The six keys to normal occlusion [J]. Am J Orthod, 1972, 62(3): 296-309.
[12] De Smit A, Dermaut L. Soft-tissue profile preference [J]. Am J Orthod, 1984, 86(1): 67-73.
[13] Cao L, Zhang K, Bai D. Effect of maxillary incisor labiolingual inclination and anteroposterior position on smiling profile esthetics [J]. Angle Orthod, 2011, 81(1): 121-129.
[14] Schlosser JB, Preston CB, Lampasso J. The effects of computer-aided anteroposterior maxillary incisor movement on ratings of facial attractiveness [J]. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 2005, 127(1): 17-24.
[15] Rosen HM. Aesthetic guidelines in genioplasty: the role of facial disproportion [J]. Plast Reconstr Surg, 1995, 95(3): 463-469.
[16] Guyuron B. MOC-PS(SM) CME article: genioplasty [J]. Plast Reconstr Surg, 2008, 121(4 Suppl): 1-7.
[17] Gonzalfz-ulloa M. Quantitative principles in cosmetic surgery of the face (profileplasty)[J]. Plast Reconstr Surg, 1962, 29: 186-198.
[18] Kerr WJ, O'Donnell JM. Panel perception of facial attractiveness [J]. Br J Orthod, 1990, 17(4): 299-304.