» Articles » PMID: 25700990

Regional Facial Asymmetries in Unilateral Orofacial Clefts

Overview
Journal Eur J Orthod
Specialty Dentistry
Date 2015 Feb 22
PMID 25700990
Citations 6
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Objectives: Assess facial asymmetry in subjects with unilateral cleft lip (UCL), unilateral cleft lip and alveolus (UCLA), and unilateral cleft lip, alveolus, and palate (UCLP), and to evaluate which area of the face is most asymmetrical.

Methods: Standardized three-dimensional facial images of 58 patients (9 UCL, 21 UCLA, and 28 UCLP; age range: 8.6-12.3 years) and 121 controls (age range 9-12 years) were mirrored and distance maps were created. Absolute mean asymmetry values were calculated for the whole face, cheek, nose, lips, and chin. One-way analysis of variance, Kruskal-Wallis, and t-test were used to assess the differences between clefts and controls for the whole face and separate areas.

Results: Clefts and controls differ significantly for the whole face as well as in all areas. Asymmetry is distributed differently over the face for all groups. In UCLA, the nose was significantly more asymmetric compared with chin and cheek (P = 0.038 and 0.024, respectively). For UCL, significant differences in asymmetry between nose and chin and chin and cheek were present (P = 0.038 and 0.046, respectively). In the control group, the chin was the most asymmetric area compared to lip and nose (P = 0.002 and P = 0.001, respectively) followed by the nose (P = 0.004). In UCLP, the nose, followed by the lips, was the most asymmetric area compared to chin, cheek (P < 0.001 and P = 0.016, respectively).

Limitations: Despite division into regional areas, the method may still exclude or underrate smaller local areas in the face, which are better visualized in a facial colour coded distance map than quantified by distance numbers. The UCL subsample is small.

Conclusion: Each type of cleft has its own distinct asymmetry pattern. Children with unilateral clefts show more facial asymmetry than children without clefts.

Citing Articles

Comparative CBCT Analysis of Maxillofacial Skeletal Structures in Patients with Unilateral Cleft Lip and Palate and Non-Cleft Individuals.

Haylaz E, Kalabalik F, Cicek O, Gumussoy I, Aytugar E Diagnostics (Basel). 2024; 14(22).

PMID: 39594221 PMC: 11592767. DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics14222555.


3-dimensional analysis of hard- and soft-tissue symmetry in a Chinese population.

Zhao J, Xu Y, Wang J, Lu Z, Qi K BMC Oral Health. 2023; 23(1):432.

PMID: 37386472 PMC: 10308641. DOI: 10.1186/s12903-023-03163-z.


3D stereophotogrammetry in children and adolescents with Scleroderma En Coup De Sabre/Parry-Romberg Syndrome: Description of a novel method for monitoring disease progression.

Ter Horst R, Maal T, de Koning M, Mertens J, Schatorje E, Hoppenreijs E Skin Health Dis. 2022; 2(3):e132.

PMID: 36092259 PMC: 9435452. DOI: 10.1002/ski2.132.


An Innovative Assessment of the Dynamics of Facial Movements in Surgically Managed Unilateral Cleft Lip and Palate Using 4D Imaging.

Gattani S, Ju X, Gillgrass T, Bell A, Ayoub A Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2020; 57(9):1125-1133.

PMID: 32419475 PMC: 7594373. DOI: 10.1177/1055665620924871.


Outcome of facial contour asymmetry after conventional two-dimensional versus computer-assisted three-dimensional planning in cleft orthognathic surgery.

Hsu P, Denadai R, Pai B, Lin H, Lo L Sci Rep. 2020; 10(1):2346.

PMID: 32047228 PMC: 7012815. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-58682-4.