Nose shape, size, and inclination influence facial appearance, but few studies concern the relationship between the nasal profile and craniofacial structures. The objective of this study was to analyze association of nasal cephalometric variables with skeletal structures, age, and sex. Cephalometric and nasal analysis was performed in 386 Polish orthodontic patients (aged 9–25 years). Student t-test and Mann–Whitney test were used to compare quantitative variables and Pearson’s or Spearman’s correlation coefficients—to find correlations. Soft tissue facial convexity angle correlates to Holdaway ratio, ANB (A-Nasion-B), and Wits appraisal. Nasal dorsum axis, nose length, nose depth (1) and nose depth (2), nose hump, lower dorsum convexity, and columella convexity increase with age. Nasal base angle, nasolabial angle, nasomental angle, soft tissue facial convexity and nasal bone angle decrease with age. Nasal base angle and nasomental angle are smaller in females. Thus, a relationship exists between nasal morphology and sagittal jaw configuration. Nasal parameters significantly change with age. Sexual dimorphism characterizes nasal bone angle and nasomental angle.

The nose is the most prominent structure of the face, influencing facial appearance and profile. Orthodontists have an awareness of facial structures, including nasal morphology, when diagnosing and treatment planning. Maxillofacial surgeons influence facial profile by bimaxillary surgery, improving facial aesthetics and harmony. The aim of this review was to summarize the available methods of analysing nasal morphology and profile, and to assess their complexity. A literature search was conducted in PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Embase using the following search terms: “nasal profile analysis”, “nasolabial angle”, and “nasal profile cephalometric” in order to select studies providing knowledge on correlations between occlusion and nasal development, differences between skeletal classes, ethnic variability, and differences between the sexes. Studies concerning genetic disorders were excluded. Finally, 17 full-text papers were analysed, which pertained to nasolabial angle, or facial profile including the nose. Data concerning methods, ethnic group, reference landmarks used, and measurements made were extracted and placed in tables. Numerous methods of nasal profile analysis can be found in the literature. These methods describe various numbers of parameters, which have influence on facial aesthetic. Nasal parameters are correlated to skeletal class and nasolabial angle, positions of upper incisors, and maxillary inclination.

Sella turcica abnormalities were reported in malocclusions and clefts. No studies were found on sella turcica abnormalities in CPO patients. This study aimed to compare the prevalence of sella turcica abnormalities on cephalometric radiographs in CPO versus non-cleft orthodontic patients. Cephalograms of CPO patients (n = 89) and controls (n = 89) were analyzed for normal sella turcicae and sella turcica abnormalities. Then, cephalometric analysis was performed using specialized software. Statistical analysis was performed using the Rv.4.1.1 package. No variation in or anomaly of the sella turcica was more frequent in CPO compared to non-cleft individuals. Patients with hypertrophic posterior clinoid process had higher interincisal and 1+:Nasion-A angles. Subjects with hypertrophic posterior clinoid process and double contour of the floor had higher Sella-Nasion-A, Sella-Nasion-B and Sella-Nasion-Pogonion and lower ANB. A pyramidal shape of the dorsum sellae was more prevalent in males, as was double contour of the floor in females. Subjects with an oblique anterior wall had lower SNB, GntgoAr and NLA. Subjects with a normal sella had higher SNPg, ML-NSL and 1+:NAmm. A normal sella was more prevalent in younger patients. CPO is not associated with sella turcica abnormalities compared to non-cleft orthodontic patients.