Cargando…

Three-dimensional assessment of facial asymmetry in class III subjects, part 2: evaluating asymmetry index and asymmetry scores

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the outcomes of corrective surgical treatment for craniofacial asymmetry using four different methods with the aim of developing the best technique for craniofacial asymmetry assessment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: CBCT images of twenty-one class III subjects with surgically corre...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ajmera, Deepal Haresh, Zhang, Congyi, Ng, Janson Hoi Hei, Hsung, Richard Tai‑Chiu, Lam, Walter Yu Hang, Wang, Wenping, Leung, Yiu Yan, Khambay, Balvinder S., Gu, Min
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10560190/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37615775
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00784-023-05193-x
_version_ 1785117676434096128
author Ajmera, Deepal Haresh
Zhang, Congyi
Ng, Janson Hoi Hei
Hsung, Richard Tai‑Chiu
Lam, Walter Yu Hang
Wang, Wenping
Leung, Yiu Yan
Khambay, Balvinder S.
Gu, Min
author_facet Ajmera, Deepal Haresh
Zhang, Congyi
Ng, Janson Hoi Hei
Hsung, Richard Tai‑Chiu
Lam, Walter Yu Hang
Wang, Wenping
Leung, Yiu Yan
Khambay, Balvinder S.
Gu, Min
author_sort Ajmera, Deepal Haresh
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the outcomes of corrective surgical treatment for craniofacial asymmetry using four different methods with the aim of developing the best technique for craniofacial asymmetry assessment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: CBCT images of twenty-one class III subjects with surgically corrected craniofacial asymmetry and twenty-one matched controls were analyzed. Twenty-seven hard tissue landmarks were used to quantify asymmetry using the following methodologies: the asymmetry index (AI), asymmetry scores based on the clinically derived midline (CM), Procrustes analysis (PA), and modified Procrustes analysis (MPA). RESULTS: Modified Procrustes analysis successfully identified pre-operative asymmetry and revealed severe asymmetry at the mandibular regions compared to controls, which was comparable to the asymmetry index and clinically derived midline methods, while Procrustes analysis masked the asymmetric characteristics. Likewise, when comparing the post-surgical outcomes, modified Procrustes analysis not only efficiently determined the changes evidencing decrease in facial asymmetry but also revealed significant residual asymmetry in the mandible, which was congruent with the asymmetry index and clinically derived midline methods but contradictory to the results shown by Procrustes analysis. CONCLUSIONS: In terms of quantifying cranio-facial asymmetry, modified Procrustes analysis has evidenced to produce promising results that were comparable to the asymmetry index and the clinically derived midline, making it a more viable option for craniofacial asymmetry assessment. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Modified Procrustes analysis is proficient in evaluating cranio-facial asymmetry with more valid clinical representation and has potential applications in assessing asymmetry in a wide spectrum of patients, including syndromic patients.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10560190
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-105601902023-10-09 Three-dimensional assessment of facial asymmetry in class III subjects, part 2: evaluating asymmetry index and asymmetry scores Ajmera, Deepal Haresh Zhang, Congyi Ng, Janson Hoi Hei Hsung, Richard Tai‑Chiu Lam, Walter Yu Hang Wang, Wenping Leung, Yiu Yan Khambay, Balvinder S. Gu, Min Clin Oral Investig Research OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the outcomes of corrective surgical treatment for craniofacial asymmetry using four different methods with the aim of developing the best technique for craniofacial asymmetry assessment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: CBCT images of twenty-one class III subjects with surgically corrected craniofacial asymmetry and twenty-one matched controls were analyzed. Twenty-seven hard tissue landmarks were used to quantify asymmetry using the following methodologies: the asymmetry index (AI), asymmetry scores based on the clinically derived midline (CM), Procrustes analysis (PA), and modified Procrustes analysis (MPA). RESULTS: Modified Procrustes analysis successfully identified pre-operative asymmetry and revealed severe asymmetry at the mandibular regions compared to controls, which was comparable to the asymmetry index and clinically derived midline methods, while Procrustes analysis masked the asymmetric characteristics. Likewise, when comparing the post-surgical outcomes, modified Procrustes analysis not only efficiently determined the changes evidencing decrease in facial asymmetry but also revealed significant residual asymmetry in the mandible, which was congruent with the asymmetry index and clinically derived midline methods but contradictory to the results shown by Procrustes analysis. CONCLUSIONS: In terms of quantifying cranio-facial asymmetry, modified Procrustes analysis has evidenced to produce promising results that were comparable to the asymmetry index and the clinically derived midline, making it a more viable option for craniofacial asymmetry assessment. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Modified Procrustes analysis is proficient in evaluating cranio-facial asymmetry with more valid clinical representation and has potential applications in assessing asymmetry in a wide spectrum of patients, including syndromic patients. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2023-08-24 2023 /pmc/articles/PMC10560190/ /pubmed/37615775 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00784-023-05193-x Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Research
Ajmera, Deepal Haresh
Zhang, Congyi
Ng, Janson Hoi Hei
Hsung, Richard Tai‑Chiu
Lam, Walter Yu Hang
Wang, Wenping
Leung, Yiu Yan
Khambay, Balvinder S.
Gu, Min
Three-dimensional assessment of facial asymmetry in class III subjects, part 2: evaluating asymmetry index and asymmetry scores
title Three-dimensional assessment of facial asymmetry in class III subjects, part 2: evaluating asymmetry index and asymmetry scores
title_full Three-dimensional assessment of facial asymmetry in class III subjects, part 2: evaluating asymmetry index and asymmetry scores
title_fullStr Three-dimensional assessment of facial asymmetry in class III subjects, part 2: evaluating asymmetry index and asymmetry scores
title_full_unstemmed Three-dimensional assessment of facial asymmetry in class III subjects, part 2: evaluating asymmetry index and asymmetry scores
title_short Three-dimensional assessment of facial asymmetry in class III subjects, part 2: evaluating asymmetry index and asymmetry scores
title_sort three-dimensional assessment of facial asymmetry in class iii subjects, part 2: evaluating asymmetry index and asymmetry scores
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10560190/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37615775
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00784-023-05193-x
work_keys_str_mv AT ajmeradeepalharesh threedimensionalassessmentoffacialasymmetryinclassiiisubjectspart2evaluatingasymmetryindexandasymmetryscores
AT zhangcongyi threedimensionalassessmentoffacialasymmetryinclassiiisubjectspart2evaluatingasymmetryindexandasymmetryscores
AT ngjansonhoihei threedimensionalassessmentoffacialasymmetryinclassiiisubjectspart2evaluatingasymmetryindexandasymmetryscores
AT hsungrichardtaichiu threedimensionalassessmentoffacialasymmetryinclassiiisubjectspart2evaluatingasymmetryindexandasymmetryscores
AT lamwalteryuhang threedimensionalassessmentoffacialasymmetryinclassiiisubjectspart2evaluatingasymmetryindexandasymmetryscores
AT wangwenping threedimensionalassessmentoffacialasymmetryinclassiiisubjectspart2evaluatingasymmetryindexandasymmetryscores
AT leungyiuyan threedimensionalassessmentoffacialasymmetryinclassiiisubjectspart2evaluatingasymmetryindexandasymmetryscores
AT khambaybalvinders threedimensionalassessmentoffacialasymmetryinclassiiisubjectspart2evaluatingasymmetryindexandasymmetryscores
AT gumin threedimensionalassessmentoffacialasymmetryinclassiiisubjectspart2evaluatingasymmetryindexandasymmetryscores