A R Sawyer1, M See, C Nduka. 1. Plastic Surgery Department, Queen Victoria Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Holtye Road, East Grinstead, West Sussex RH19 3DZ, UK. drasawyer@hotmail.com
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Rubin observed that there was a great deal of variation in smiles. [Rubin LR. The anatomy of a smile: its importance in the treatment of facial paralysis. Plast Reconstr Surg 1974;53:384-7] Smile reconstruction requires an understanding of the facial movements that occur during a normal smile. Facial reanimation should be tailored for each individual patient so that the movements on the reconstructed side are similar to that on the normal side. AIM: The aim of this study is to produce a quantitative analysis of smiles, as a basis for smile reconstruction and to compare our subject's smiles to the classification suggested by Rubin. METHOD: The smiles of 71 volunteers were analysed using three-dimensional (3D) stereophotogrammetry in x, y and z vectors. Each subject had the distances and angles of 10 surface landmarks (cheilion left and right (L&R), labiale superius/inferius, mid-lateral upper/lower lip (L&R), nasolabial fold (L&R)) moved from the relaxed position to that in a maximum smile. All subjects' smiles were classified into the Rubin subtypes of corner of the mouth, canine and full-denture smile. RESULTS: The average distances and angles moved by oral landmarks during a smile in a 3D plane were--cheilion: 16.6mm at 31 degrees ; labiale superius: 8.2mm at 31 degrees; upper mid-lateral lip: 10.5mm at 25 degrees; labiale inferius: 5.3mm at -56 degrees; lower mid-lateral lip: 7.8mm at 41 degrees and nasolabial fold: 12.6mm at 33 degrees . Our population results for the smile subtypes suggested by Rubin were--corner-of-the-mouth smile: 77%, canine smile: 15% and full-denture smile: 8%. CONCLUSION: Our study offers a simple quantitative method for measuring the smile to assess the outcome of reanimation surgery between different surgical procedures and units. Proportions of our study group with corner-of-the-mouth, canine and full-denture smiles were consistent with Rubin's study. Copyright (c) 2008 British Association of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
INTRODUCTION: Rubin observed that there was a great deal of variation in smiles. [Rubin LR. The anatomy of a smile: its importance in the treatment of facial paralysis. Plast Reconstr Surg 1974;53:384-7] Smile reconstruction requires an understanding of the facial movements that occur during a normal smile. Facial reanimation should be tailored for each individual patient so that the movements on the reconstructed side are similar to that on the normal side. AIM: The aim of this study is to produce a quantitative analysis of smiles, as a basis for smile reconstruction and to compare our subject's smiles to the classification suggested by Rubin. METHOD: The smiles of 71 volunteers were analysed using three-dimensional (3D) stereophotogrammetry in x, y and z vectors. Each subject had the distances and angles of 10 surface landmarks (cheilion left and right (L&R), labiale superius/inferius, mid-lateral upper/lower lip (L&R), nasolabial fold (L&R)) moved from the relaxed position to that in a maximum smile. All subjects' smiles were classified into the Rubin subtypes of corner of the mouth, canine and full-denture smile. RESULTS: The average distances and angles moved by oral landmarks during a smile in a 3D plane were--cheilion: 16.6mm at 31 degrees ; labiale superius: 8.2mm at 31 degrees; upper mid-lateral lip: 10.5mm at 25 degrees; labiale inferius: 5.3mm at -56 degrees; lower mid-lateral lip: 7.8mm at 41 degrees and nasolabial fold: 12.6mm at 33 degrees . Our population results for the smile subtypes suggested by Rubin were--corner-of-the-mouth smile: 77%, canine smile: 15% and full-denture smile: 8%. CONCLUSION: Our study offers a simple quantitative method for measuring the smile to assess the outcome of reanimation surgery between different surgical procedures and units. Proportions of our study group with corner-of-the-mouth, canine and full-denture smiles were consistent with Rubin's study. Copyright (c) 2008 British Association of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.