» Articles » PMID: 38556951

Correlation Between Cephalometric Values and Soft Tissue Profile in Class I and Class II Adult Patients Based on Vertical Patterns

Overview
Journal Turk J Orthod
Specialty Dentistry
Date 2024 Apr 1
PMID 38556951
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
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.

Citing Articles

Three-Dimensional Assessment of Collum Angle in Different Sagittal Malocclusions: A Cross-Sectional Study.

Sen S, Singh R, Majumder S, Tzudir N, Chakraborty S, Sharma M Cureus. 2024; 16(9):e70418.

PMID: 39473680 PMC: 11519709. DOI: 10.7759/cureus.70418.

References
1.
Maetevorakul S, Viteporn S . Factors influencing soft tissue profile changes following orthodontic treatment in patients with Class II Division 1 malocclusion. Prog Orthod. 2016; 17:13. PMC: 4852168. DOI: 10.1186/s40510-016-0125-1. View

2.
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

3.
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

4.
Amini F, Razavian Z, Rakhshan V . Soft tissue cephalometric norms of Iranian Class I adults with good occlusions and balanced faces. Int Orthod. 2016; 14(1):108-22. DOI: 10.1016/j.ortho.2015.12.003. View

5.
Halazonetis D . Morphometric evaluation of soft-tissue profile shape. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2007; 131(4):481-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2005.06.031. View