Philippe Farha, Sarah Abu Arqub, Mona Sayegh Ghoussoub
{"title":"Correlation Between Cephalometric Values and Soft Tissue Profile in Class I and Class II Adult Patients based on Vertical Patterns.","authors":"Philippe Farha, Sarah Abu Arqub, Mona Sayegh Ghoussoub","doi":"10.4274/TurkJOrthod.2023.2022.20","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To compare soft tissue profile variations between Class I and Class II adult patients due to three vertical skeletal facial patterns (normodivergent, hypodivergent and hyperdivergent) and determine which skeletal variation has the most significant impact on soft tissue profile.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Retrospective soft tissue profile analysis was performed on lateral cephalograms of 131 adult patients. The analysis was divided into two categories correlated with subnasal and general soft tissue profiles. The sample was divided based on two sagittal skeletal patterns (Class I and II) and three vertical groups. In addition, comparisons were made between males and females. Viewbox 4 was used for the analysis. Descriptive, comparative, and correlation statistics were performed using SPSS software.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Statistically significant inter-gender differences were found at the subnasal profile level, but not at the general profile level. No significant differences were observed when comparing subnasal profiles for the sagittal groups. However, significant differences were observed at the level of the general profile, especially at the level of Z-angle, lower lip, and chin prominence. In the vertical groups, hyperdivergent facial patterns had significant differences at the level of subnasal and general profiles compared with other vertical facial patterns.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Females had more convex subnasal profiles than males. Hyperdivergent facial patterns had an impact on both general and subnasal soft tissue profiles. The sagittal dimension affected only the general soft tissue profile. Therefore, changes in the vertical dimension had the greatest impact on facial esthetics.</p>","PeriodicalId":37013,"journal":{"name":"Turkish Journal of Orthodontics","volume":"37 1","pages":"36-43"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10986451/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Turkish Journal of Orthodontics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4274/TurkJOrthod.2023.2022.20","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objective: To compare soft tissue profile variations between Class I and Class II adult patients due to three vertical skeletal facial patterns (normodivergent, hypodivergent and hyperdivergent) and determine which skeletal variation has the most significant impact on soft tissue profile.
Methods: Retrospective soft tissue profile analysis was performed on lateral cephalograms of 131 adult patients. The analysis was divided into two categories correlated with subnasal and general soft tissue profiles. The sample was divided based on two sagittal skeletal patterns (Class I and II) and three vertical groups. In addition, comparisons were made between males and females. Viewbox 4 was used for the analysis. Descriptive, comparative, and correlation statistics were performed using SPSS software.
Results: Statistically significant inter-gender differences were found at the subnasal profile level, but not at the general profile level. No significant differences were observed when comparing subnasal profiles for the sagittal groups. However, significant differences were observed at the level of the general profile, especially at the level of Z-angle, lower lip, and chin prominence. In the vertical groups, hyperdivergent facial patterns had significant differences at the level of subnasal and general profiles compared with other vertical facial patterns.
Conclusion: Females had more convex subnasal profiles than males. Hyperdivergent facial patterns had an impact on both general and subnasal soft tissue profiles. The sagittal dimension affected only the general soft tissue profile. Therefore, changes in the vertical dimension had the greatest impact on facial esthetics.