Facial Soft Tissue Thickness Among Skeletal Malocclusions: is There a Difference?

Overview

Journal Korean J Orthod

Date 2012 Nov 1

PMID 23112928

Citations 18

Authors

Hasan Kamak

Mevlut Celikoglu

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Objective: The purpose of this study was to determine the soft tissue thickness of male and female orthodontic patients with different skeletal malocclusions.

Methods: Soft tissue thickness measurements were made on lateral cephalometric radiographs of 180 healthy orthodontic patients with different skeletal malocclusions (Class I: 60 subjects, Class II: 60 subjects, Class III: 60 subjects). Ten measurements were analyzed. For statistical evaluation, one-way ANOVA and Kruskal-Wallis tests were performed. Least significant difference (LSD) and Dunnet T3 post hoc tests were used to determine the individual differences.

Results: Soft tissue thicknesses were found to be greater for men than for women. Statistically significant differences among the skeletal groups were found in both men and women at the following sites: labrale superius, stomion, and labrale inferius. The thickness at the labrale superius and stomion points in each skeletal type was the greatest in Class III for both men and women. On the other hand, at the labrale inferius point, for both men and women, soft tissue depth was the least in Class III and the greatest in Class II.

Conclusions: Soft tissue thickness differences among skeletal malocclusions were observed at the labrale superius, stomion, and labrale inferius sites for both men and women.

Citing Articles

Evaluation of the soft tissue facial profile in different skeletal malocclusions in relation to age.

Kielczykowski M, Perkowski K, Kaminski K, Zadurska M, Czochrowska E BMC Oral Health. 2024; 24(1):711.

PMID: 38902685 PMC: 11191204. DOI: 10.1186/s12903-024-04486-1.

Effect of body mass index on soft tissues in adolescents with skeletal class I and normal facial height.

Karsli N, Tuhan Kutlu E PeerJ. 2023; 11:e16196.

PMID: 37810775 PMC: 10557952. DOI: 10.7717/peerj.16196.

Global facial soft tissue thicknesses for craniofacial identification (2023): a review of 140 years of data since Welcker's first study.

Hona T, Stephan C Int J Legal Med. 2023; 138(2):519-535.

PMID: 37804332 PMC: 10861615. DOI: 10.1007/s00414-023-03087-x.

Do facial soft tissue thicknesses change after surgeries correcting dental malocclusions? An intra- and inter-patient statistical analysis on soft-tissue thicknesses in BSSO + LFI surgeries.

Olivetti E, Marcolin F, Moos S, Vezzetti E, Borbon C, Zavattero E Clin Oral Investig. 2023; 27(9):5049-5062.

PMID: 37369817 DOI: 10.1007/s00784-023-05124-w.

Gender differences in lower facial soft tissue thickness among different skeletal patterns, based on soft tissue cephalometric analysis.

Alhumadi A, Al-Khafaji T, Hussein Alyassiri A, Alhamadi W J Orthod Sci. 2022; 11:54.

PMID: 36411805 PMC: 9674943. DOI: 10.4103/jos.jos_38_22.

References

Utsuno H, Kageyama T, Uchida K, Yoshino M, Miyazawa H, Inoue K . Facial soft tissue thickness in Japanese children. Forensic Sci Int. 2010; 199(1-3):109.e1-6. DOI: 10.1016/j.forsciint.2010.02.016. View

Arnett G, Gunson M . Facial planning for orthodontists and oral surgeons. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2004; 126(3):290-5. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2004.06.006. View

Hwang H, Kim W, McNamara Jr J . 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. DOI: 10.1043/0003-3219(2002)072<0072:EDITST>2.0.CO;2. View

Holdaway R . A soft-tissue cephalometric analysis and its use in orthodontic treatment planning. Part I. Am J Orthod. 1983; 84(1):1-28. DOI: 10.1016/0002-9416(83)90144-6. View

Erbay E, Caniklioglu C . Soft tissue profile in Anatolian Turkish adults: Part II. Comparison of different soft tissue analyses in the evaluation of beauty. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2002; 121(1):65-72. DOI: 10.1067/mod.2002.119573. View

Cooke M, Wei S . Cephalometric standards for the southern Chinese. Eur J Orthod. 1988; 10(3):264-72. DOI: 10.1093/ejo/10.3.264. View

Arnett G, Bergman R . Facial keys to orthodontic diagnosis and treatment planning. Part I. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1993; 103(4):299-312. DOI: 10.1016/0889-5406(93)70010-L. View

Uysal T, Yagci A, Basciftci F, Sisman Y . Standards of soft tissue Arnett analysis for surgical planning in Turkish adults. Eur J Orthod. 2009; 31(4):449-56. DOI: 10.1093/ejo/cjn123. View

Kalha A, Latif A, Govardhan S . Soft-tissue cephalometric norms in a South Indian ethnic population. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2008; 133(6):876-81. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2006.05.043. View

10.

Holdaway R . A soft-tissue cephalometric analysis and its use in orthodontic treatment planning. Part II. Am J Orthod. 1984; 85(4):279-93. DOI: 10.1016/0002-9416(84)90185-4. View

11.

Basciftci F, Uysal T, Buyukerkmen A . Determination of Holdaway soft tissue norms in Anatolian Turkish adults. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2003; 123(4):395-400. DOI: 10.1067/mod.2003.139. View

12.

Hamdan A . Soft tissue morphology of Jordanian adolescents. Angle Orthod. 2009; 80(1):80-5. PMC: 8978739. DOI: 10.2319/010809-17.1. View

13.

Arnett G, Bergman R . Facial keys to orthodontic diagnosis and treatment planning--Part II. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1993; 103(5):395-411. DOI: 10.1016/s0889-5406(05)81791-3. View

14.

Utsuno H, Kageyama T, Uchida K, Yoshino M, Oohigashi S, Miyazawa H . Pilot study of facial soft tissue thickness differences among three skeletal classes in Japanese females. Forensic Sci Int. 2009; 195(1-3):165.e1-5. DOI: 10.1016/j.forsciint.2009.10.013. View

15.

Nanda R, NANDA R . Cephalometric study of the dentofacial complex of North Indians. Angle Orthod. 1969; 39(1):22-8. DOI: 10.1043/0003-3219(1969)039<0022:CSOTDC>2.0.CO;2. View

16.

Erbay E, Caniklioglu C, Erbay S . 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. DOI: 10.1067/mod.2002.119780. View

17.

Miyajima K, McNamara Jr J, Kimura T, Murata S, Iizuka T . Craniofacial structure of Japanese and European-American adults with normal occlusions and well-balanced faces. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1996; 110(4):431-8. DOI: 10.1016/s0889-5406(96)70047-1. View

18.

Celikoglu M, Kazanci F, Miloglu O, Oztek O, Kamak H, Ceylan I . Frequency and characteristics of tooth agenesis among an orthodontic patient population. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2010; 15(5):e797-801. DOI: 10.4317/medoral.15.e797. View

19.

Bacon W, Girardin P, Turlot J . A comparison of cephalometric norms for the African Bantu and a caucasoid population. Eur J Orthod. 1983; 5(3):233-40. DOI: 10.1093/ejo/5.3.233. View

20.

HOUSTON W . The analysis of errors in orthodontic measurements. Am J Orthod. 1983; 83(5):382-90. DOI: 10.1016/0002-9416(83)90322-6. View