The facial profile in brazilian adults

  • Taísa Figueiredo Chagas
  • Mariana Martins e Martins
  • José Nelson Mucha

Abstract

Aim: To investigate if there is agreement between measurement values obtained for Brazilian adults and the values recommended by Holdaway, Merrifield, Burstone, Steiner and Ricketts, for facial profile soft tissue analysis.
Methods: A sample of 30 cephalometric radiographs was used, consisting of 15 women and 15 men, aged 18 to 31 years, all exhibiting excellent occlusion and balanced facial profile. Comparisons were made with the measurement values proposed by the aforementioned authors using Student’s t-test and to determine the correlation between the ANB and Â-H measurement values described by Holdaway, using Pearson’s  correlation coefficient. Results: Among the measures evaluated, 4 showed statistically significant differences: Â.Z (Merrifield), S-LS and S-LI (Steiner), and E-LI (Ricketts) relative to the standards recommended by the authors. The measurement values advocated by Merrifield, Steiner and Ricketts showed statistical differences, and as for the Z-angle, Brazilians feature a slightly more convex profile, which appeared slightly concave according to Steiner, and according to the E-Plane (Ricketts), it meant an increased protrusion of the lower lip. Conclusion: It could be asserted that adult Brazilians have a slightly more convex facial profile than US standards, but these differences should be viewed with caution, as they are clinically unimportant.

References

1. Tikku T, Khanna R, Maurya RP, Verma S L, Srivastava K.,Kadu, M. Cephalometric norms for orthognathic surgery in North Indian population using Nemoceph software. J Oral Biol Craniofac Res. 2014;4(2):94-103.
2. Aldrees AM. Lateral cephalometric norms for Saudi adults: A meta-analysis. Saudi Dent J. 2011;23(1):3-7.
3. Haskell BS, Segal ES. Ethnic and ethical challenges in treatment planning: dealing with diversity in the 21st century. Angle Orthod. 2014;84(2):380-2.
4. Scavone H, Zahn-Silva W, do Valle-Corotti KM, Nahás AC. Soft tissue profile in white brazilian adults with normal occlusions and well-Balanced faces. Angle Orthod. 2008;78(1):58-63.
5. Kiekens RM, Maltha JC, Hof MAT, Kuijpers-Jagtman AM. Objective measures as indicators for facial esthetics in white adolescents. Angle Orthod. 2006;76(4):551-6.
6. Steiner CC. Cephalometrics for you and me. Am J Orthod 1953;39(10):729-55.
7. Tweed CH. The Frankfort mandibular incisal angle (FMIA) in orthodontic diagnosis, treatment planning and prognosis. Angle Orthod 1954;24(3):121-69.
8. Ricketts RM. Esthetics, enviroments, and the law of lip relation. Am J Orthod. 1968;54(4):272-89.
9. Holdaway RA. Soft-tissue cephalometric analysis and its use in orthodontic treatment planning. Am J Orthod. 1983;84(1):1-28.
10. Burstone CJ. Lip posture and its significance in treatment planning. Am J Orthod 1967;53(4):262-84
11. Merrifield LL. The profile line as an aid in critically evaluating facial esthetics. Am J Orthod 1966;52(11):804-22
12. Leichsenring A, Invernici S, Maruo IT, Maruo H, Ignácio SA, Tanaka O. Evaluation of the Merrifield´s “Z” angle in the mixed dentition. Rev. de Clín. Pesq. Odontol 2004;1(2):9-14.
13. Yu XN, Bai D, Feng X, Liu YH, Chen WJ, Li S et al. Correlation Between Cephalometric Measures and End-of-Treatment Facial Attractiveness. Journal of Craniofacial Surgery. 2016;27(2), 405-409.
14. Bishara SE, Treder JE, Jakobsen JR. Facial and dental changes in adulthood. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 994;106(2):175-86.
15. Chaconas SJ; Bratroff JD. Prediction of normal soft-tissue facial changes. Angle Orthod. 1975;45(1):12-25.
16. Erbay EF, Caniklioğlu CM, Erbay ŞK. Soft tissue profile in Anatolian Turkish adults: Part I. Evaluation
of horizontal lip position using different soft tissue analyses. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2002;121(1):57-64.
17. Isiekwe GI, Olatokunbo CO, Chukwudi IM. A cephalometric investigation of horizontal lip position in
adult Nigerians. J Orthod 2012;39(3):160-9.
18. Sharma JN. Steiner’s cephalometric norms for the Nepalese population. J Orthod. 2011;38(1):21-31.
19. Freitas LMAD, Freitas KMSD, Pinzan A, Janson G, Freitas MRD. A comparison of skeletal, dentoalveolar and soft tissue characteristics in white and black Brazilian subjects. J Appl Oral Sci 2010;18(2):135-42.
20. Nobuyasu M, Myahara M, Takahashi T, Attizzani A, Maruo H, Rino W, Carvalho SMRD. Padrões cefalométricos de Ricketts aplicados a indivíduos brasileiros com oclusão excelente. Rev Dental Press Ortod Ortop Facial 007;12(1):125-56.
21. Czarnecki ST, Nanda RS, Currier GF. Perceptions of a balanced facial profile. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1993;104(2):180-7.
22. Lahlou K, Bahoum A, Makhoukhi MB, Aalloula EH. Comparison of dentoalveolar protrusion values in Moroccans and other populations. Eur J Orthod 2010;32(4):430-4.
23. Hwang HS, Kim WS, McNamara Jr JA. Ethnic differences in the soft tissue profile of Korean and European-American adults with normal occlusions and well-balanced faces. Angle orthod 2002;72(1):72-80.
24. Chaconas SJ. A statistical evaluation of nasal growth. AmJ Orthod 1969;56(4):403-14.
25. Fernandes TMF, Pinzan A, Sathler R, Freitas MRD, Janson G, Vieira FP. Comparative study of the soft tissue of young Japanese-Brazilian, Caucasian and Mongoloid patients. Dental Press J Orthod. 2013;18(2):116-24.
Published
2017-11-13
How to Cite
CHAGAS, Taísa Figueiredo; MARTINS E MARTINS, Mariana; MUCHA, José Nelson. The facial profile in brazilian adults. Brazilian Journal of Oral Sciences, [S.l.], p. e17040, nov. 2017. ISSN 1677-3225. Available at: <https://www.fop.unicamp.br/bjos/index.php/bjos/article/view/169>. Date accessed: 15 july 2019. doi: https://doi.org/10.20396/bjos.v16i1.8651062.
Section
Original Research

Most read articles by the same author(s)