True vertical validation in facial orthognathic surgery planning
Objectives: To validate the effectiveness of the original standards of True Vertical (TV) Subnasal Line in orthognatic surgery planning. The present study evaluates the changes occurring in patients with skeletal Class II alterations programmed for orthognathic surgery with a view to improving their...
| Autores: | , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Tipo de recurso: | artículo |
| Estado: | Versión enviada para evaluación y publicación |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2013 |
| País: | España |
| Institución: | Universidad de Sevilla (US) |
| Repositorio: | idUS. Depósito de Investigación de la Universidad de Sevilla |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:idus.us.es:11441/32729 |
| Acceso en línea: | http://hdl.handle.net/11441/32729 https://doi.org/10.4317/jced.511 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palabra clave: | Facial profile Class II Orthognathic surgery Cephalometric analysis Facial soft tissue Subnasale vertical |
| Sumario: | Objectives: To validate the effectiveness of the original standards of True Vertical (TV) Subnasal Line in orthognatic surgery planning. The present study evaluates the changes occurring in patients with skeletal Class II alterations programmed for orthognathic surgery with a view to improving their facial profile. Study desing: We showed a series of black profiles (composed by a first control group of subjects with normal occlusion, and another two additional groups comprised patients before –Group 2- and after orthognatic surgical correction of Class II malocclusion -Group 3-) for three groups of observers (orthodontists, surgeons and laypeople). The facial images became black silhouettes in order to determine a series of parameters (including aesthetic assessment) by means of the observers. Their observation were assessed using a 5-point Likert scale. Results: The sample was composed of 52 profile’s subjects who were tested for a total of 72 observers. Aesthetic assessment yielded mean scores of 2.57, 1.67 and 2.46 for groups 1, 2 and 3, respectively. There was a statistically significant difference (p<0.001) between group 1 versus group 2. There were no significant differences in terms of observer assessment of aesthetics, with the exception of a wider perception range among the orthodontists. Regarding the studied profile measures, significant differences were recorded for point B’ and Pg’ (p<0.02) between groups 2 and 3 (i.e., pre- versus post-surgery). Conclusions: The results of our study suggest the subnasale vertical and sagittal measures of the lower third of the face are decisive in facial aesthetics, and therefore also for the planning of orthognathic urgery. Consequently, these aesthetic parameters can be used as an objective tool for the planning of orthodontic treatment. |
|---|