Incisors′ proportions in smile esthetics

Alsulaimani, Fahad F.; Batwa, Waeil

doi:10.4103/2278-0203.119685

Cited by 10 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, the height remained slightly higher in the unaesthetic smile group. Another study was conducted by Alsulaimani et al (16) to realise if changes in the upper central and lateral incisors' length and width could influence the perception of smile attractiveness and to conclude the most desirable length and width for the incisors. They found that changes in the incisors' width and length influenced relative smile desirability for people, dentists and orthodontists.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of Maxillary Central Incisor, Crown Angulation and Tooth Size Variation in Aesthetic and Non-aesthetic Smiles- A Cross Sectional Study

Shyagali

Singh²,

Tiwari

et al. 2021

Iran J Ortho

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: An attractive smile is often attributed to incisor alignment and proclined or retroclined incisors could contribute to a less aesthetic smile. Objectives: This study was aimed to evaluate the maxillary central incisor crown inclination, crown angulation and tooth size variation in aesthetic and unattractive smiles. Methods: This study was conducted among 100 females (equally divided into aesthetic and unaesthetic smile groups), aged between15 - 25 years, with Angle’s Class I normal occlusion and balanced profiles. Variations in maxillary central incisor crown inclination and angulation were measured on lateral cephalograms, photographs and the study models of the subjects. Variations in tooth morphology were also evaluated by measuring crown height and width in both groups. Mann-Whitney U test was performed to evaluate the difference between the aesthetic and unaesthetic smiles. P < 0.05 was considered as significant. Results: This study showed that incisor angulation was significantly higher in the unaesthetic group compared to the aesthetic group (P < 0.001). However, there was no statistically significant difference for the incisor inclination relative to the Palatal Plane between the aesthetic and unaesthetic smile groups (P = 0.086). In addition, there were significant differences between the aesthetic and the non-aesthetic groups regarding the central incisor height (P < 0.05). Conclusions: The findings of this study indicate that the possible variations in aesthetics are related to the ethnic elements that are associated with differences in crown angulations, as well as tooth size.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of Maxillary Central Incisor, Crown Angulation and Tooth Size Variation in Aesthetic and Non-aesthetic Smiles- A Cross Sectional Study

Shyagali

Singh²,

Tiwari

et al. 2021

Iran J Ortho

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

The perception of smile attractiveness to altered vertical position of maxillary anteriors by various groups

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is a gap in research about the differences in smile attractiveness. The problem the study addresses is how the vertical canine and incisor position affect smile attractiveness. The aim of this study was to assess the perception of the smile attractiveness between Saudi laypersons, orthodontists, non-orthodontist, and various dental students levels, and to determine how the canine and incisor vertical positions affect the attractiveness of smile. The study is a cross-sectional survey and was conducted at King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. Six groups of subjects participated in the study: Orthodontic residents (n = 31), prosthodontic, restorative, periodontics specialties residents specialties residents (n = 30), interns (n = 31), fifth year students (n = 41), 6th year students (n = 39), and laypeople (n = 39). Participants were asked to rate the attractiveness of a smile of a female subject photographed using a Minolta DiMage 7i digital camera. The image had been manipulated to produce 2 sets of images; 1 to modify the incisors and 1 to change the canines. The subjects were asked to choose the most and least attractive picture. For the best incisor positions, only the laypeople and prosthodontics liked the original picture, the rest liked +0.5 mm which accentuate the smile curve and make it follow the lower lip line. For the worst incisor position, all groups did not prefer the minus 1.5 reversed smile. For the best canine vertical position, all groups preferred the original position where canine was at the level of the incisal plane. For the worst canine position, they all disliked the minus 1.5 reversed smile. Results confirmed past findings that orthodontists are in general more critical about smile attractiveness than laypersons, but just like other dental specialists. The findings can be used in the esthetic dentistry field, but further research on the study population based on other dental design parameters remain necessary.

show abstract

Influence of maxillary lateral incisor width ratio on perception of smile esthetics among orthodontists and laypersons

Florez

Rinchuse

Zullo

2020

J Esthet Restor Dent

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective This study aimed to analyze the impact of different maxillary lateral incisor width ratios on the perception of smile esthetics among orthodontists and laypersons. Methods A smile photograph of a male subject showing the lips and gingival margins was selected. The smile was standardized for maxillary central incisor width proportions and ideally perceived smile esthetics. The maxillary lateral incisor width was symmetrically modified in increments of ratios of the central incisor from a ratio of 4:10 to a ratio of 8:10. The images were analyzed by 283 laypersons and 83 orthodontists who ranked the level of attractiveness using a visual analog scale. Results There were significant differences between the esthetic perception of the five different width ratios, and between the orthodontists and laypersons in their evaluations of esthetics (P < 0.0004). There were no significant differences in esthetic evaluations between genders. Conclusions For orthodontists, the most attractive width ratio was 5.7:10, while the highest ranked ratio among laypersons was 8:10, although laypersons ranked all ratios very similarly. Both groups ranked the width ratio of 4:10 the lowest. Orthodontists were more critical in their assessment of esthetics. Clinical significance To what proportions or protocol should a peg‐shaped maxillary lateral incisor or missing lateral, that is, to be replaced with an implant/crown be restored? This is an important clinical question that is often encountered by the orthodontist and the restoring dentist. The literature suggests that orthodontists and laypeople have different perceptions of smile esthetics, and it is important to have patient centered goals when treatment planning. Further research is necessary to identify the width ratio of which the lateral incisor is perceived to be esthetic as well as the ideal ratio to consider when restoring lateral incisors. This research assessed and compared the perception that orthodontists and laypeople have on smile esthetics regarding different width ratios of lateral incisors.

show abstract

Incisors′ proportions in smile esthetics

Cited by 10 publications

References 15 publications

Comparison of Maxillary Central Incisor, Crown Angulation and Tooth Size Variation in Aesthetic and Non-aesthetic Smiles- A Cross Sectional Study

Comparison of Maxillary Central Incisor, Crown Angulation and Tooth Size Variation in Aesthetic and Non-aesthetic Smiles- A Cross Sectional Study

The perception of smile attractiveness to altered vertical position of maxillary anteriors by various groups

Influence of maxillary lateral incisor width ratio on perception of smile esthetics among orthodontists and laypersons

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About