Using three-dimensional average facial meshes to determine nasolabial soft tissue deformity in adult UCLP patients

Wong, Ka Wai Frank; Keeling, Andrew; Achal, Kulraj; Khambay, Balvinder

doi:10.1016/j.surge.2018.04.006

Cited by 16 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Ac-Prn distance was longer on the cleft side than on the noncleft side, which was in agreement with results of previous studies. 20,28 Because of insufficient bone support within the cleft region, the nasal base was more flat and the pronasale point was deviated toward the noncleft side. Bagante et al 28 compared the Al-Prn (mm) distance, which is similar to the Ac-Prn (mm) measurement on cleft and noncleft sides of patients with UCLP.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…7,[12][13][14] These studies were conducted using various methods, such as direct anthropometric measurements, 3 postero-posteroanterior cephalometric radiographs, 15 two-dimensional photographs, 16 cone-beam computed tomographies, 17 and three-dimensional (3D) stereophotogrammetry images. [18][19][20] Posteroanterior radiographic analysis, which is frequently used to evaluate facial asymmetries, is an effective method by which to demonstrate skeletal asymmetry; however, the soft tissues that cover skeletal structures can compensate for the underlying skeletal anomaly, to either reflect it as is or as more severe. 21,22 Facial asymmetries are also 3D anomalies with frontal, sagittal, and vertical components; therefore, the use of 3D imaging methods by which to simultaneously assess these three components to examine asymmetry is presumed to be more accurate.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Evaluation of pronasale, nasolabial and paranasal asymmetries in patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate using three-dimensional imaging

Özdemir¹,

Esenlik

2020

Acta Odontologica Turcica

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

OBJECTIVE: Facial symmetry is an important component of a successful treatment of patients with cleft lip and palate. The aim of this retrospective study was to examine the pronasale, nasolabial, and paranasal region asymmetries in patients with nonsyndromic unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP) using three-dimensional (3D) facial imaging. MATERIALS AND METHOD: The study group consisted of 29 patients with complete UCLP aged 8-29 years. 3D stereophotogrammetric soft tissue recordings of all patients were analyzed. Measurements were performed on the cleft and noncleft side and compared with each other by the paired t-test. RESULTS: Statistically significant differences were observed between the cleft and noncleft sides. Alar contour-Pronasale distance was longer on the cleft side than on the noncleft side, with the difference between them being statistically significant (p<0.05). The Subnasale-Pronasale / Alar contour-Pronasale ratio was also significantly lower on the cleft side than on the noncleft side (p<0.05). CONCLUSION: Patients with UCLP did not present significant asymmetries regarding Cheek and Buccal contours and Chelion-Subnasale and Christa Philtry-Subnasale heights. Asymmetrical appearance was prominent on alar base and pronasale regions.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of pronasale, nasolabial and paranasal asymmetries in patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate using three-dimensional imaging

Özdemir¹,

Esenlik

2020

Acta Odontologica Turcica

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As this finding has widely been demonstrated for normal populations 34,46 , valid deductions could be made from normal-related comparisons. Different from mid-face or nasolabial measurement-based outcome investigations 35,36,47 , in this study we addressed particularly the lower face region. In the literature, facial asymmetry is frequently observed in patients with skeletal Class III malocclusion, with the lower face representing the main anatomical site for presence of asymmetries compared to upper and middle face regions [1][2][3] .…”

Section: Lateral Lower Chin N (%)mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In our study, the normal individuals had significantly lower RMSD and higher FDI values than OGS-treated patients in the pre-OGS period, regardless of tested group. Therefore, in addition to the typical cleft-associated nasolabial asymmetric deformity 35,36,47 , the lower third of the face appears [12][13][14] to be an additional leading factor in facial asymmetry in patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate.…”

Section: Lateral Lower Chin N (%)mentioning

confidence: 99%

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

Hsu

Denadai

Pai

et al. 2020

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Computer-assisted 3D planning has overcome the limitations of conventional 2D planning-guided orthognathic surgery (OGS), but difference for facial contour asymmetry outcome has not been verified to date. This comparative study assessed the facial contour asymmetry outcome of consecutive patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate who underwent 2D planning (n = 37)-or 3D simulation (n = 38)-guided OGS treatment for correction of maxillary hypoplasia and skeletal Class III malocclusion between 2010 and 2018. Normal age-, gender-, and ethnicity-matched individuals (n = 60) were enrolled for comparative analyses. 2D (n = 60, with 30 images for each group) and 3D (n = 43, with 18 and 25 images for 2D planning and 3D simulation groups, respectively) photogrammetric-based facial contour asymmetry-related measurements were collected from patients and normal individuals. The facial asymmetry was further verified by using subjective perception of a panel composed of 6 blinded raters. On average, the facial contour asymmetry was significantly (all p < 0.05) reduced after 3D virtual surgery planning for all tested parameters, with no significant differences between post-OGS 3D simulation-related values and normal individuals. No significant differences were observed for pre-and post-OGS values in conventional 2D planning-based treatment, with significant (all p < 0.05) differences for all normal individuals-related comparisons. This study suggests that 3D planning presents superior facial contour asymmetry outcome than 2D planning.Orthognathic surgery (OGS) plays a key role for successful management of a myriad of facial deformities associated with malocclusion, with facial asymmetry feature being most frequently associated with skeletal class III malocclusion 1-3 . Particularly, patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate differ from the noncleft population, because they have a congenital orofacial defect compromising both the bone and soft tissues on the lesion side 4-6 , which may be expressed as facial asymmetry 7-15 . Skeletal mature patients with clefts frequently presents with maxillomandibular disharmony (maxillary hypoplasia and skeletal class III malocclusion) which requires OGS treatment 7-15 . As residual facial asymmetry after OGS treatment may negatively impact patients' perceptions about outcome requiring further revisionary surgical interventions [16][17][18][19] , the significance of preoperative prediction of this deformity should not be underestimated 15,16,20 . Therefore, it is of paramount that an accurate diagnosis of asymmetry is accomplished preoperatively for that a precise surgical planning and execution is performed 7,15,16,20 .In this setting, OGS planning has evolved over the past decades 15-24 . Traditionally, OGS planning has been constructed on two-dimensional (2D) cephalometry, 2D photographic analysis, articulators, and dental models 21,22 . However, this planning modality presents limitations for challenging clinical scenarios such as patients with clefts associated with malocclusion a...

show abstract

“…Then using dense correspondence analysis to create a 3D average face. An alternative software solution for generating an average 3D facial mesh is the use of MorphAnalyser, which has been used to assess cleft outcome in adults 13 and infants 14 . MorphAnalyser again uses a base mesh and dense correspondence to create an average 3D facial mesh template.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Anthropometric accuracy of three-dimensional average faces compared to conventional facial measurements

Shan

Hsung

Zhang

et al. 2021

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study aimed to evaluate and compare the accuracy of average faces constructed by different methods. Original three-dimensional facial images of 26 adults in Chinese ethnicity were imported into Di3DView and MorphAnalyser for image processing. Six average faces (Ave_D15, Ave_D24, Ave_MG15, Ave_MG24, Ave_MO15, Ave_MO24) were constructed using “surface-based registration” method with different number of landmarks and template meshes. Topographic analysis was performed, and the accuracy of six average faces was assessed by linear and angular parameters in correspondence with arithmetic means calculated from individual original images. Among the six average faces constructed by the two systems, Ave_MG15 had the highest accuracy in comparison with the conventional method, while Ave_D15 had the least accuracy. Other average faces were comparable regarding the number of discrepant parameters with clinical significance. However, marginal and non-registered areas were the most inaccurate regions using Di3DView. For MorphAnalyser, the type of template mesh had an effect on the accuracy of the final 3D average face, but additional landmarks did not improve the accuracy. This study highlights the importance of validating software packages and determining the degree of accuracy, as well as the variables which may affect the result.

show abstract

Using three-dimensional average facial meshes to determine nasolabial soft tissue deformity in adult UCLP patients

Cited by 16 publications

References 31 publications

Evaluation of pronasale, nasolabial and paranasal asymmetries in patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate using three-dimensional imaging

Evaluation of pronasale, nasolabial and paranasal asymmetries in patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate using three-dimensional imaging

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

Anthropometric accuracy of three-dimensional average faces compared to conventional facial measurements

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Using three-dimensional average facial meshes to determine nasolabial soft tissue deformity in adult UCLP patients

Cited by 16 publications

References 31 publications

Evaluation of pronasale, nasolabial and paranasal asymmetries in patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate using three-dimensional imaging

Evaluation of pronasale, nasolabial and paranasal asymmetries in patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate using three-dimensional imaging

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

Anthropometric﻿ accuracy of three-dimensional average faces compared to conventional facial measurements

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Anthropometric accuracy of three-dimensional average faces compared to conventional facial measurements