Differentiation between maxillary and malar midface position within the facial profile
Aims To define midfacial position differentiating maxillary and zygomatic regions and to evaluate the corresponding cephalometric characteristics discerning midfacial flatness and fullness. Material and Methods A total of 183 pretreatment lateral cephalometric radiographs of non-growing orthodontic...
| Main Authors: | , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
PeerJ Inc.
2019-12-01
|
| Series: | PeerJ |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://peerj.com/articles/8200.pdf |
| _version_ | 1797420111317958656 |
|---|---|
| author | Chimène Chalala Joseph G. Ghafari |
| author_facet | Chimène Chalala Joseph G. Ghafari |
| author_sort | Chimène Chalala |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Aims To define midfacial position differentiating maxillary and zygomatic regions and to evaluate the corresponding cephalometric characteristics discerning midfacial flatness and fullness. Material and Methods A total of 183 pretreatment lateral cephalometric radiographs of non-growing orthodontic patients (age 25.98 ± 8.43 years) screened at our university orthodontic clinic. The lateral cephalographs of the orthodontic patients were stratified in four groups: flat, normal toward flat, normal toward full, full,according to distances from nasion and sella to points J and G (NJ, SJ, NG and SG). J is the midpoint of the distance connecting orbitale to point A, and G the center of the triangle connecting orbit, key ridge and pterygomaxillary fissure. Statistics included the Kendall tau-b test for best associations among measurements. Results All measurements were statistically significantly different between flat and full groups. The highest associations were between NJ and SJ (τb = 0.71; p < 0.001) and NG and SG (τb = 0.70; p < 0.001). Flat midfaces were characterized by canting of the cranial base and palatal plane, hyperdivergent pattern and maxillary retrognathism. The opposite was true for fuller midfaces. Conclusion Midface skeletal location was assessed differentially in the naso-maxillary and malo-zygomatic structures differentially. Craniofacial characteristics were identified according to this stratification, indicating the potential for application in facial diagnosis and need for testing on 3D cone-beam computed tomography images. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-09T06:56:57Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-3a87ada945774477a89220068a588ee5 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2167-8359 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-09T06:56:57Z |
| publishDate | 2019-12-01 |
| publisher | PeerJ Inc. |
| record_format | Article |
| series | PeerJ |
| spelling | doaj.art-3a87ada945774477a89220068a588ee52023-12-03T10:02:38ZengPeerJ Inc.PeerJ2167-83592019-12-017e820010.7717/peerj.8200Differentiation between maxillary and malar midface position within the facial profileChimène Chalala0Joseph G. Ghafari1Departments of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, Lebanese University and American University of Beirut, Beirut, LebanonDivision of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, American University of Beirut, Beirut, LebanonAims To define midfacial position differentiating maxillary and zygomatic regions and to evaluate the corresponding cephalometric characteristics discerning midfacial flatness and fullness. Material and Methods A total of 183 pretreatment lateral cephalometric radiographs of non-growing orthodontic patients (age 25.98 ± 8.43 years) screened at our university orthodontic clinic. The lateral cephalographs of the orthodontic patients were stratified in four groups: flat, normal toward flat, normal toward full, full,according to distances from nasion and sella to points J and G (NJ, SJ, NG and SG). J is the midpoint of the distance connecting orbitale to point A, and G the center of the triangle connecting orbit, key ridge and pterygomaxillary fissure. Statistics included the Kendall tau-b test for best associations among measurements. Results All measurements were statistically significantly different between flat and full groups. The highest associations were between NJ and SJ (τb = 0.71; p < 0.001) and NG and SG (τb = 0.70; p < 0.001). Flat midfaces were characterized by canting of the cranial base and palatal plane, hyperdivergent pattern and maxillary retrognathism. The opposite was true for fuller midfaces. Conclusion Midface skeletal location was assessed differentially in the naso-maxillary and malo-zygomatic structures differentially. Craniofacial characteristics were identified according to this stratification, indicating the potential for application in facial diagnosis and need for testing on 3D cone-beam computed tomography images.https://peerj.com/articles/8200.pdfMidface positionMaxillary flatnessMaxillary fullnessCephalometric landmarks |
| spellingShingle | Chimène Chalala Joseph G. Ghafari Differentiation between maxillary and malar midface position within the facial profile PeerJ Midface position Maxillary flatness Maxillary fullness Cephalometric landmarks |
| title | Differentiation between maxillary and malar midface position within the facial profile |
| title_full | Differentiation between maxillary and malar midface position within the facial profile |
| title_fullStr | Differentiation between maxillary and malar midface position within the facial profile |
| title_full_unstemmed | Differentiation between maxillary and malar midface position within the facial profile |
| title_short | Differentiation between maxillary and malar midface position within the facial profile |
| title_sort | differentiation between maxillary and malar midface position within the facial profile |
| topic | Midface position Maxillary flatness Maxillary fullness Cephalometric landmarks |
| url | https://peerj.com/articles/8200.pdf |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT chimenechalala differentiationbetweenmaxillaryandmalarmidfacepositionwithinthefacialprofile AT josephgghafari differentiationbetweenmaxillaryandmalarmidfacepositionwithinthefacialprofile |