Comparison of the facial profile attractiveness in Class III borderline patients after surgical or compensatory orthodontic treatment

Watanabe, Julie Heide Miyazaki; Fitarelli, Francisco; Freitas, Daniel Salvatore de; Cançado, Rodrigo-Hermont; Oliveira, Renata Cristina Gobbi de; Oliveira, Ricardo César Gobbi de; Valarelli, Fabrício Pinelli; Freitas, Karina-Maria-Salvatore

doi:10.4317/jced.56750

Cited by 13 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Watanabe et al [ 18 ] compared the facial profile attractiveness of profile silhouettes between Class III cases treated with orthognathic surgery and orthodontic camouflage and found that the surgery provided a greater improvement with treatment, and the final attractiveness was similar between the groups. However, at the beginning of treatment, the surgical group presented a lesser attractive facial profile than the camouflage group, and this is a limitation of their study.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Class III malocclusion patients selected for surgical treatment are likely to have more severe skeletal discrepancy than those treated with orthodontic camouflage [ 16 , 17 ]. Surgical treatment is associated with significant decompensation of the mandibular incisors [ 17 , 18 ]. Class III patients treated with either camouflage or surgery treatment are likely to finish with slightly proclinated maxillary incisors [ 17 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Recently, a research compared the attractiveness of the facial profile of Class III cases treated with orthodontic camouflage and orthognathic surgery [ 18 ]. The results showed that the profile attractiveness is similar in Class III patients after orthognathic surgery or orthodontic camouflage, but the surgical treatment provided more improvement in the facial profile attractiveness [ 18 ]. However, at the initial stage, cases treated with orthodontic camouflage presented more pleasant profiles than the surgically treated group, and this could have influenced the results [ 18 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Comparison of Profile Attractiveness between Class III Orthodontic Camouflage and Predictive Tracing of Orthognathic Surgery

Wadi¹,

Freitas²,

Freitas³

et al. 2020

International Journal of Dentistry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective. The aim of this study was to compare the profile attractiveness between orthodontic camouflage of the Class III malocclusion and the predictive tracing simulating orthognathic surgery evaluated by dentists and laypeople. Settings and sample population. The sample consisted of 21 patients (9 male; 12 female) with Class III malocclusion treated with orthodontic camouflage and Class III intermaxillary elastics. Material and Methods. The mean initial age of the patients was 24.38 years (SD 3.32), and the mean ANB angle was −1.91° (SD 0.83°). Patients presented skeletal Class III and normal growth patterns. Initial and final lateral cephalograms of each patient were used. The initial cephalogram was used to perform the treatment simulation of orthognathic surgery, and its silhouette was compared to the silhouette obtained from the final cephalogram after Class III orthodontic camouflage. A subjective analysis of profile attractiveness was performed by 47 laypeople and 60 dentists, with scores from 1 (less attractive) to 10 (most attractive). Mann–Whitney tests were used to compare profile attractiveness between the orthodontic treatment and the predictive tracing groups and between dentists and laypeople. Results. The predictive tracing of orthognathic surgery showed to be statistically significantly more attractive (mean score 4.57, SD 2.47) than that of the Class III camouflage orthodontic treatment (mean score 4.22, SD 2.40), with a mean numerical but significant difference of 0.35 (SD 2.01) (P<0.001). Laypeople were more critical than dentists in evaluating profile attractiveness, but numerical difference between the groups was also small. Conclusion. The profile silhouette of predictive tracing simulating orthognathic surgery showed to be more attractive than that of Class III camouflage orthodontic treatment; however, differences were small but statistically significant. Laypeople showed to be more critical than dentists.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Comparison of Profile Attractiveness between Class III Orthodontic Camouflage and Predictive Tracing of Orthognathic Surgery

Wadi¹,

Freitas²,

Freitas³

et al. 2020

International Journal of Dentistry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Combined orthodontic and orthognathic surgical treatment may be required in some cases to achieve the required esthetic and functional results [ 8 ]. If there is any skeletal problem that is beyond the limits of camouflage treatment according to the envelope of discrepancy, any trial on dental compensation may reach a reasonably acceptable occlusion using miniscrews as methods of absolute anchorage.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Combined Orthodontic and Surgical Management for Treatment of Severe Class III Malocclusion with Anterior and Posterior Crossbites

Alogaibi

Alsulaimani

Jamal

et al. 2021

Case Reports in Dentistry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Severe class III malocclusion can be a great challenge, especially in adult patients. This case report describes an adult patient with severe skeletal class III malocclusion and with an obvious maxillary deficiency and mandibular excess causing both anterior and posterior crossbites in addition to a shift in the upper and lower midlines to the left concerning the facial midline. This was complicated by compensatory mechanisms such as the proclination of upper incisors and retroclination of lower incisors. Decompensation of the upper and lower arches was performed combined with upper arch expansion to relieve crowding in the upper arch and correct the posterior crossbite. This was followed by double jaw surgeries, including Le Fort I osteotomy in the maxilla and bilateral sagittal split osteotomy (BSSO) in the mandible. Orthodontic finishing procedures were then used to correct any other dental discrepancies. Remarkable esthetic and functional results were achieved with high patient satisfaction.

show abstract

Smile attractiveness in class III patients after orthodontic camouflage or orthognathic surgery

Reis¹,

Freitas²,

Oliveira³

et al. 2021

Clin Oral Invest

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Comparison of the facial profile attractiveness in Class III borderline patients after surgical or compensatory orthodontic treatment

Cited by 13 publications

References 12 publications

Comparison of Profile Attractiveness between Class III Orthodontic Camouflage and Predictive Tracing of Orthognathic Surgery

Comparison of Profile Attractiveness between Class III Orthodontic Camouflage and Predictive Tracing of Orthognathic Surgery

Combined Orthodontic and Surgical Management for Treatment of Severe Class III Malocclusion with Anterior and Posterior Crossbites

Smile attractiveness in class III patients after orthodontic camouflage or orthognathic surgery

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About