Kate Sutherland1,2,3, Julia L Chapman4,5, Elizabeth A Cayanan6,4, Aimee B Lowth7,6,8, Keith K H Wong6,4,9, Brendon J Yee6,4,9, Ronald R Grunstein6,4,9, Nathaniel S Marshall6,4, Peter A Cistulli7,6,8. 1. Charles Perkins Centre, University of Sydney, Camperdown, NSW, 2006, Australia. kate.sutherland@sydney.edu.au. 2. Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, 2006, Australia. kate.sutherland@sydney.edu.au. 3. Centre for Sleep Health & Research, Department of Respiratory & Sleep Medicine, Royal NorthShore Hospital, 8A, Acute Services Building, Reserve Road, St Leonards, NSW, 2065, Australia. kate.sutherland@sydney.edu.au. 4. NeuroSleep NHMRC Centre or Research Excellence and Woolcock Institute of Medical Research, Glebe, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia. 5. Sydney Local Health District, Sydney, Australia. 6. Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, 2006, Australia. 7. Charles Perkins Centre, University of Sydney, Camperdown, NSW, 2006, Australia. 8. Centre for Sleep Health & Research, Department of Respiratory & Sleep Medicine, Royal NorthShore Hospital, 8A, Acute Services Building, Reserve Road, St Leonards, NSW, 2065, Australia. 9. Department of Respiratory and Sleep Medicine, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Camperdown, New South Wales, Australia.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Craniofacial structure is an important risk factor in the development of obstructive sleep apnoea. Most craniofacial imaging methods are not feasible for large-scale studies or the clinic. Craniofacial photography is a high-throughput technique for facial phenotyping; however, derived measurements are a composite of skeletal and soft tissue craniofacial information. Weight change is a paradigm to help determine which facial measurements most relate to regional soft tissue (i.e. change with weight) versus skeletal structure (i.e. stable with weight changes). We aimed to assess the association between weight change and changes in key facial measurements from facial photography. METHODS: Calibrated frontal and profile photographs were taken of participants in weight loss studies (N = 106). Univariate linear regression was used to assess whether weight change explained changes in facial dimensions. RESULTS: Patients lost 11.7 ± 10.8 kg body weight and 2.0 ± 2.0 cm of neck circumference. Weight changes influenced face width (r = 0.3, p < 0.001), mandibular width (r = 0.4, p < 0.001) and cervicomental angle (r = 0.3, p = 0.001). Facial angles, facial heights and mandibular length were not influenced by weight change. CONCLUSIONS: A weight loss paradigm suggests that face and mandibular width and cervicomental angle most strongly reflect regional adiposity. Facial angles and heights are insensitive to weight change and could be more representative of craniofacial skeletal structure. This study informs the interpretation of facial phenotype assessed by this craniofacial photographic method which can be applied to future studies of craniofacial phenotype in OSA.
PURPOSE: Craniofacial structure is an important risk factor in the development of obstructive sleep apnoea. Most craniofacial imaging methods are not feasible for large-scale studies or the clinic. Craniofacial photography is a high-throughput technique for facial phenotyping; however, derived measurements are a composite of skeletal and soft tissue craniofacial information. Weight change is a paradigm to help determine which facial measurements most relate to regional soft tissue (i.e. change with weight) versus skeletal structure (i.e. stable with weight changes). We aimed to assess the association between weight change and changes in key facial measurements from facial photography. METHODS: Calibrated frontal and profile photographs were taken of participants in weight loss studies (N = 106). Univariate linear regression was used to assess whether weight change explained changes in facial dimensions. RESULTS:Patients lost 11.7 ± 10.8 kg body weight and 2.0 ± 2.0 cm of neck circumference. Weight changes influenced face width (r = 0.3, p < 0.001), mandibular width (r = 0.4, p < 0.001) and cervicomental angle (r = 0.3, p = 0.001). Facial angles, facial heights and mandibular length were not influenced by weight change. CONCLUSIONS: A weight loss paradigm suggests that face and mandibular width and cervicomental angle most strongly reflect regional adiposity. Facial angles and heights are insensitive to weight change and could be more representative of craniofacial skeletal structure. This study informs the interpretation of facial phenotype assessed by this craniofacial photographic method which can be applied to future studies of craniofacial phenotype in OSA.
Authors: Kate Sutherland; Richard J Schwab; Greg Maislin; Richard W W Lee; Bryndis Benedikstdsottir; Allan I Pack; Thorarinn Gislason; Sigurdur Juliusson; Peter A Cistulli Journal: Sleep Date: 2014-05-01 Impact factor: 5.849
Authors: Richard W W Lee; Kate Sutherland; Andrew S L Chan; Biao Zeng; Ronald R Grunstein; M Ali Darendeliler; Richard J Schwab; Peter A Cistulli Journal: Sleep Date: 2010-09 Impact factor: 5.849
Authors: Richard J Schwab; Michael Pasirstein; Robert Pierson; Adonna Mackley; Robert Hachadoorian; Raanan Arens; Greg Maislin; Allan I Pack Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2003-05-13 Impact factor: 21.405