Effects of different nose types on class II treatments for female patients

Abstract

BackgroundThe aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of different nose types on the perception of facial aesthetics following camouflage treatment and orthognathic surgery for skeletal class II female patients.MethodsA pre-treatment profile photograph of a skeletal class II adult patient was selected from the department archive. Two constructed photographs were created to represent orthognathic surgery and camouflage treatments with the aid of computer software. A total of 18 constructed images was composed using three profiles (pre-treatment, post-camouflage, and post-orthognathic surgery) and six nose types. These photographs were shown to the three groups (orthodontists, plastic surgeons, and lay people), and they were asked to assign an attractiveness score to each photo ranging from 0 to 100, with 0 indicating the least attractive and 100 indicating the most attractive.ResultsFor the convex nose profiles, anterior movement of the mandible obtained by orthognathic surgery did not result in a significant change in the scores given by the lay people. When surgical or camouflage treatment was not implemented and, instead, just rhinoplasty was performed for these profiles, there was a significant increase in the aesthetic scores given by all groups. For the straight nose profiles, orthognathic surgery increased the attractiveness scores given by all groups. Furthermore, for all the profiles, extraction treatment did not affect the aesthetic scores given by any of the groups (P > 0.05).ConclusionsThe lay people perceived that having a convex-bridged nose was a bigger problem than having a retrognathic profile. Overall, in terms of skeletal and dental orthodontic treatments, nose shape should be considered during the treatment planning process.

Temporary anchorage devices-steering the treatment of borderline orthognathic case to an orthodontic approach

“…When this is the case, the best way to achieve the desired results is by performing camouflage treatment. 3 The need for absolute anchorage in our case was because of the Angle's Class II molar relation of the patient which warranted no further anchor loss which would result in mesialisation of maxillary molars. So, inter radicular implants were a proven choice for the retraction of the maxillary anterior dentition.…”

Perceived Effects of Orthognathic Surgery versus Orthodontic Camouflage Treatment of Convex Facial Profile Patients

“…Profile image simulation studies have shown favorable effects of both surgical and camouflage approaches, with surgical ones receiving higher scores from orthodontists and laypeople [ 22 ]. Other simulation studies emphasized the role of the nose in the perceived outcomes and favored more clearly the surgical approaches over camouflage treatment [ 23 ]. So far, there are very few studies that used actual patient images to compare the effects of orthodontic camouflage with surgical-orthodontic treatment and these present conflicting outcomes [ 19 , 21 , 24 ].…”