Objective: To determine the influence of landmark labeling on the accuracy and precision of an indirect facial anthropometric technique. Materials and Methods: Eighteen standard linear craniofacial measurements were obtained from 10 adults using the 3dMDface system, with landmarks labeled (Labeled_3D) and without landmarks labeled (Unlabeled_3D) before image acquisition, and these were compared with direct anthropometry (Caliper). Images were acquired twice in two different sessions 1 week apart (T1 and T2). Accuracy and precision were determined by comparing mean measurement values and absolute differences between the three methods. Results: Mean measurements derived from three-dimensional (3D) images and direct anthropologic measurements were mostly similar. However, statistically significant differences (P , .01) were noted for seven measurements in Labeled_3D and six measurements in Unlabeled_3D. The magnitudes of these differences were clinically insignificant (,2 mm). In terms of precision, results demonstrated good reproducibility for both methods, with a tendency toward more precise values in Labeled_3D, when compared with the other two techniques (P , .05). We found that Labeled_3D provided the most precise values, Unlabeled_3D produced less precise measurements, and Caliper was the least capable of generating precise values. Conclusions: Overall, soft tissue facial measurement with the 3dMDface system demonstrated similar accuracy and precision with traditional anthropometry, regardless of landmarking before image acquisition. Larger disagreements were found regarding measurements involving ears and soft tissue landmarks without distinct edges. The 3dMDface system demonstrated a high level of precision, especially when facial landmarks were labeled. (Angle Orthod. 2011;81:245-252.)

Robinow syndrome (RS) is a rare genetic condition with two inheritance forms, autosomal dominant RS (DRS) and autosomal recessive RS (RRS). The characteristic features of this syndrome overlap in both inheritance forms, which make the clinical differential diagnosis difficult, especially in isolated cases. The objective of this study was to identify differences in the craniofacial and intraoral phenotype of patients with DRS and RRS. The characteristics and frequency of 13 facial and 13 intraoral clinical features associated with both DRS and RRS were assessed by direct dysmorphology examination and using a digital photographic analysis in 12 affected subjects. Although the phenotypic presentation varied and overlapped in the two forms of the syndrome, there were differences in the severity of the craniofacial and intraoral features. The craniofacial dysmorphology of RS was more severe in RRS. Nasal anomalies were the most frequent craniofacial features in both DRS and RRS. In contrast, intraoral features such as wide retromolar ridge, alveolar ridge deformation, malocclusion, dental crowding and hypodontia were more severe in patients with DRS. Overall, facial characteristics appeared less pronounced in adult subjects compared to younger subjects. Craniofacial and intraoral findings are highly variable in RS, with abnormalities of the intraoral structures being more prominent in the DRS form. We propose that the difference in the alveolar ridge deformation pattern and severity of other intraoral characteristics could enhance the differential diagnosis of the two forms of this syndrome.

The maxillary alveolar bone area is increased in the impacted side compared with the nonimpacted side.

IntroductionA reliable method to assess midpalatal suture maturation to drive clinical decision-making, towards non-surgical or surgical expansion, in adolescent and young adult patients is needed. The objectives were to systematically review and evaluate what is known regarding contemporary methodologies capable of assessing midpalatal suture maturation in humans.MethodsA computerized database search was conducted using Medline, PubMed, Embase and Scopus to search the literature up until October 5, 2016. A supplemental hand search was completed of references from retrieved articles that met the final inclusion criteria.ResultsTwenty-nine abstracts met the initial inclusion criteria. Following assessment of full articles, only five met the final inclusion criteria. The number of subjects involved and quality of studies varied, ranging from an in-vitro study using autopsy material to prospective studies with in vivo human patients. Three types of evaluations were identified: quantitative, semi-quantitative and qualitative evaluations. Four of the five studies utilized computed tomography (CT), while the remaining study utilized non-invasive ultrasonography (US). No methodology was validated against a histological-based reference standard.ConclusionsWeak limited evidence exists to support the newest technologies and proposed methodologies to assess midpalatal suture maturation. Due to the lack of reference standard validation, it is advised that clinicians still use a multitude of diagnostic criteria to subjectively assess palatal suture maturation and drive clinical decision-making.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13005-017-0144-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.