-
Something wrong with this record ?
Nasolabial aesthetics correlates poorly with skeletal symmetry in unilateral cleft lip and palate
W. Urbanova, A. Brudnicki, H. Strydom, EM. Bronkhorst, C. Katsaros, PS. Fudalej,
Language English Country Netherlands
Document type Journal Article
- MeSH
- Facial Asymmetry congenital MeSH
- Child MeSH
- Esthetics * MeSH
- Cephalometry MeSH
- Humans MeSH
- Statistics, Nonparametric MeSH
- Nose pathology surgery MeSH
- Facial Bones anatomy & histology MeSH
- Lip pathology surgery MeSH
- Cleft Palate pathology surgery MeSH
- Cleft Lip pathology surgery MeSH
- Treatment Outcome MeSH
- Check Tag
- Child MeSH
- Humans MeSH
- Male MeSH
- Female MeSH
- Publication type
- Journal Article MeSH
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the correlation between symmetry of the craniofacial skeleton and aesthetics of the nose and upper lip in children with complete unilateral cleft lip and palate (CUCLP). MATERIAL AND METHODS: Craniofacial symmetry was evaluated on postero-anterior (PA) cephalograms of 54 children (37 boys and 17 girls; mean age = 11.0 years, SD 1.6) with CUCLP repaired with a one-stage closure (Cleft group). Treated subjects were age- and gender-matched with 54 untreated subjects taken from the University of Michigan Growth Study (Control group). Fourteen coefficients of asymmetry (CAs) were calculated and four angles were measured. Four raters assessed the nasolabial appearance on cropped facial and profile photographs with the 5-grade aesthetic index of Asher-McDade (grade 1 means the most aesthetic and grade 5 the least aesthetical outcome) in the Cleft group only. Independent t-tests were used to evaluate the inter-group differences for CAs. Pearson's correlation coefficients were calculated to examine a relationship between particular components of the aesthetical index and CAs. Multiple regression analyses were carried out to explain the nasolabial aesthetics on the basis of craniofacial symmetry. RESULTS: In the Cleft group, most cephalometric variables demonstrated asymmetry not exceeding 10%. The Cleft and Control groups differed regarding three angular measurements (Se, Ism, and ANS) and 1 CA (Mo-V). Three of the four nasolabial components demonstrated correlation with some cephalometric variables. However, the correlation coefficients were low (range: -0.309 to 0.305). CONCLUSIONS: There is a weak correlation between craniofacial skeletal symmetry and aesthetics of the nose and upper lip in children with CUCLP.
References provided by Crossref.org
- 000
- 00000naa a2200000 a 4500
- 001
- bmc13012457
- 003
- CZ-PrNML
- 005
- 20130415114424.0
- 007
- ta
- 008
- 130404s2013 ne f 000 0|eng||
- 009
- AR
- 024 7_
- $a 10.1016/j.bjps.2012.08.032 $2 doi
- 035 __
- $a (PubMed)22985870
- 040 __
- $a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
- 041 0_
- $a eng
- 044 __
- $a ne
- 100 1_
- $a Urbanova, Wanda $u Department of Orthodontics and Cleft Anomalies, 3rd Medical Faculty, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic.
- 245 10
- $a Nasolabial aesthetics correlates poorly with skeletal symmetry in unilateral cleft lip and palate / $c W. Urbanova, A. Brudnicki, H. Strydom, EM. Bronkhorst, C. Katsaros, PS. Fudalej,
- 520 9_
- $a OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the correlation between symmetry of the craniofacial skeleton and aesthetics of the nose and upper lip in children with complete unilateral cleft lip and palate (CUCLP). MATERIAL AND METHODS: Craniofacial symmetry was evaluated on postero-anterior (PA) cephalograms of 54 children (37 boys and 17 girls; mean age = 11.0 years, SD 1.6) with CUCLP repaired with a one-stage closure (Cleft group). Treated subjects were age- and gender-matched with 54 untreated subjects taken from the University of Michigan Growth Study (Control group). Fourteen coefficients of asymmetry (CAs) were calculated and four angles were measured. Four raters assessed the nasolabial appearance on cropped facial and profile photographs with the 5-grade aesthetic index of Asher-McDade (grade 1 means the most aesthetic and grade 5 the least aesthetical outcome) in the Cleft group only. Independent t-tests were used to evaluate the inter-group differences for CAs. Pearson's correlation coefficients were calculated to examine a relationship between particular components of the aesthetical index and CAs. Multiple regression analyses were carried out to explain the nasolabial aesthetics on the basis of craniofacial symmetry. RESULTS: In the Cleft group, most cephalometric variables demonstrated asymmetry not exceeding 10%. The Cleft and Control groups differed regarding three angular measurements (Se, Ism, and ANS) and 1 CA (Mo-V). Three of the four nasolabial components demonstrated correlation with some cephalometric variables. However, the correlation coefficients were low (range: -0.309 to 0.305). CONCLUSIONS: There is a weak correlation between craniofacial skeletal symmetry and aesthetics of the nose and upper lip in children with CUCLP.
- 650 _2
- $a kefalometrie $7 D002508
- 650 _2
- $a dítě $7 D002648
- 650 _2
- $a rozštěp rtu $x patologie $x chirurgie $7 D002971
- 650 _2
- $a rozštěp patra $x patologie $x chirurgie $7 D002972
- 650 12
- $a estetika $7 D004954
- 650 _2
- $a asymetrie obličeje $x vrozené $7 D005146
- 650 _2
- $a obličejové kosti $x anatomie a histologie $7 D005147
- 650 _2
- $a ženské pohlaví $7 D005260
- 650 _2
- $a lidé $7 D006801
- 650 _2
- $a ret $x patologie $x chirurgie $7 D008046
- 650 _2
- $a mužské pohlaví $7 D008297
- 650 _2
- $a nos $x patologie $x chirurgie $7 D009666
- 650 _2
- $a neparametrická statistika $7 D018709
- 650 _2
- $a výsledek terapie $7 D016896
- 655 _2
- $a časopisecké články $7 D016428
- 700 1_
- $a Brudnicki, Andrzej $u -
- 700 1_
- $a Strydom, Hardus $u -
- 700 1_
- $a Bronkhorst, Ewald M $u -
- 700 1_
- $a Katsaros, Christos $u -
- 700 1_
- $a Fudalej, Piotr S $u -
- 773 0_
- $w MED00008968 $t Journal of plastic, reconstructive & aesthetic surgery : JPRAS $x 1878-0539 $g Roč. 66, č. 1 (2013), s. e1-7
- 856 41
- $u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22985870 $y Pubmed
- 910 __
- $a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y a $z 0
- 990 __
- $a 20130404 $b ABA008
- 991 __
- $a 20130415114658 $b ABA008
- 999 __
- $a ok $b bmc $g 975655 $s 810738
- BAS __
- $a 3
- BAS __
- $a PreBMC
- BMC __
- $a 2013 $b 66 $c 1 $d e1-7 $i 1878-0539 $m Journal of plastic, reconstructive & aesthetic surgery $n J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg $x MED00008968
- LZP __
- $a Pubmed-20130404