Cargando…

The Influence of Class II Division 2 Malocclusions on the Harmony of the Human Face Profile

BACKGROUND: Persons with class II division 2 malocclusion are characterized by a very specific dento-skeletal and soft-tissue profile (a profile in which a protruding nose and chin, retruding lips, concave and shortened lower third of the face, and gummy smile are dominant), which is the opposite of...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Perović, Tatjana
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: International Scientific Literature, Inc. 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5712519/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29170363
http://dx.doi.org/10.12659/MSM.905453
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: Persons with class II division 2 malocclusion are characterized by a very specific dento-skeletal and soft-tissue profile (a profile in which a protruding nose and chin, retruding lips, concave and shortened lower third of the face, and gummy smile are dominant), which is the opposite of the currently modern profiles (convex profile of protruding lips and small chin). The aim of this research was to determine the differences in parameters of harmonies of facial profiles between persons with class II division 2 malocclusions and class I, and to establish the significance of those differences. MATERIAL/METHODS: For this study, 50 patients with class II division 2 malocclusions and 50 patients with class I were selected; profile photos were recorded and a photometric analysis was done: a type of profile according to Schwarz, the shape of a nose, the prominence of chin, biometrical field, the position of lips in relation to the tangent Sn-Pg, S-line (Steiner), E-line (Riketts) and a facial angle according to Arnett. RESULTS: The significant differences in profiles of persons with class II division 2 compared to class I were: position and prominence of the chin, the position of the lower and upper lip in relation to the S-line, and smaller value of a facial angle in relation to persons with class I. CONCLUSIONS: The differences seen in skeletal profiles were not associated with significant differences in the profiled facial contours of the examined groups. The compensatory role of the fullness of soft tissues of the lips is probably the reason why there were not significant deviations in all the examined parameters.