Cephalometric and Anthropometric Changes and Their Relation to Patients' Satisfaction After Orthognathic Surgery

Facial Anthropometric Measurements and Principles - Overview and Implications for Aesthetic Treatments

Facial anatomy is highly individual in each patient. Anthropometric measurements can be a useful tool to objectively analyze individual facial anatomy to allow for better comparability before and after treatments to ultimately improve standardization of facial procedures, both nonsurgical and surgical. The aim of this study was to provide a comprehensive overview over clinically relevant and feasible facial anthropometric measurements and principles for aesthetic medicine. A literature review was conducted to describe the most important and clinically relevant anthropometric measurements and principles for both the entire face and for three aesthetically relevant facial regions: the periorbital region, the nose, and the perioral region. A multitude of different anthropometric measurements and principles have been described in the literature for both the overall facial appearance and specific facial regions. Certain generally accepted anthropometric principles and proportions need to be respected to achieve aesthetic and harmonious results. For the overall facial appearance, a focus on symmetry, certain proportions, facial angles, and indices has been described. Principles and measurements were also described for the periorbital region, the nose, and the perioral region. Although attractiveness and aesthetic perception are subjective, objective evaluation of facial surface anatomy via anthropometric measurements can improve pre- and postinterventional analysis of the face and help the treating physician to individualize treatments, both nonsurgical and surgical.

Patients Satisfaction and Nasal Morphologic Change after Orthognathic Surgery

Background:

Patients’ attitudes about their nose changes after orthognathic surgeries. We aimed to evaluate the patient’s opinion about nasal change and morphologic changes following orthognathic surgery.

Methods:

This was a cross-sectional study. The sample was derived from the population of patients who underwent orthognathic surgery in the Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Department of Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran between 2017 and 2019. Subjects who underwent orthognathic surgery were studied. Subjects filled a modified nose evaluation form before and nine months after orthognathic surgery. For objective assessment, the nasolabial angle, nasofrontal angle, nasofacial angle, tip projection, and tip deviation and alar width were evaluated. Sixty-two patients were studied.

Results:

Forty (64.5%) patients did not absolutely like their nose before orthognathic surgeries, two (3.2 %) expressed a little satisfaction, 17(27.4%) answered they liked more or less, and three liked very much. Nine months after orthognathic surgeries, 4 (6.5%) patients did not like their nose, nine patients (14.5%) liked a little, 30 (48.4%) liked more or less, and 19 liked very much. Analysis of the data demonstrated a significant difference in patients’ satisfaction with their noses before and nine months after orthognathic surgeries (P<0.001). Patients’ satisfaction nine months after orthognathic surgery was not affected by nasal morphologic changes.

Conclusion:

It seems, patients’ satisfaction with their nose improved after orthognathic surgeries. Patients’ attitude was not associated with nasal morphologic changes.