Literature DB >> 33959816

Smile attractiveness in class III patients after orthodontic camouflage or orthognathic surgery.

Gabriela Martins Reis1, Daniel Salvatore de Freitas2, Renata Cristina Oliveira1, Ricardo Cesar Gobbi de Oliveira1, Célia Regina Maio Pinzan-Vercelino3, Karina Maria Salvatore Freitas4, Fabricio Pinelli Valarelli1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The study's objective was to compare the smile attractiveness in patients with class III malocclusion treated with orthodontic camouflage or orthognathic surgery.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: The sample consisted of 30 patients with class III malocclusion treated without extractions divided into two groups, according to the treatment performed: G1, orthodontic camouflage, consisting of 15 patients (9 female; 6 male) with mean initial age of 21.26 years (SD = 7.39) and mean final age of 24.52 years (SD = 7.10). The mean treatment time was 3.26 years (SD = 1.50). G2, ortho-surgical, consisting of 15 patients (8 females; 7 males), with mean initial age of 23.12 years (SD=7.37), mean final age of 25.82 years (SD = 7.14) and mean treatment time of 2.71 years (SD = 0.90). The smile attractiveness was evaluated in black and white photographs of posed smiles taken before and after treatment, with a numerical rating scale from 1 to 10, with 1 being the least attractive and 10 the greatest smile attractiveness. The smiles were evaluated in a questionnaire by 111 participants, 67 orthodontists (mean age 41.31 years, SD = 9.44) and 44 laypeople (mean age 41.41 years, SD = 14.38). Intergroup comparison was performed with independent t test.
RESULTS: There was a significant improvement in the smile attractiveness with both camouflage and ortho-surgical treatments. The smile attractiveness was similar between the camouflage and surgical groups at the beginning. There was a significantly greater improvement in smile attractiveness with treatment in the surgical group than in the camouflage group, and at the end of treatment, the surgical group showed greater smile attractiveness than the camouflage group. Orthodontists considered the smiles more attractive both at the beginning and the end of treatment when compared to the assessment made by laypeople.
CONCLUSION: The ortho-surgical treatment promoted a greater improvement in the smile attractiveness, and at the final stage, a greater smile attractiveness than the orthodontic camouflage. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Smile attractiveness is an important characteristic of the final result of orthodontic treatment. Knowing which treatment protocol will provide a better improvement and outcome regarding smile esthetics is essential.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Class III malocclusion; Orthodontics; Orthognathic surgery; Smile

Year:  2021        PMID: 33959816     DOI: 10.1007/s00784-021-03966-w

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Oral Investig        ISSN: 1432-6981            Impact factor:   3.573


  12 in total

1.  Aesthetic evaluation of profile incisor inclination.

Authors:  Nathalie Ghaleb; Joseph Bouserhal; Nayla Bassil-Nassif
Journal:  Eur J Orthod       Date:  2010-08-17       Impact factor: 3.075

2.  Who needs surgical-orthodontic treatment?

Authors:  W R Proffit; R P White
Journal:  Int J Adult Orthodon Orthognath Surg       Date:  1990

3.  Treatment of Skeletal Class III Malocclusion with the Biofunctional System.

Authors:  Rodrigo Hermont Cancado; Karina Maria Salvatore De Freitas; Fabricio Pinelli Valarelli; Bruno Da Silva Vieira; Leniana Santos Neves
Journal:  J Clin Orthod       Date:  2015-11

Review 4.  Analysis of the smile photograph.

Authors:  Daltro Enéas Ritter; Luiz Gonzaga Gandini; Ary dos Santos Pinto; Dirceu Barnabé Ravelli; Arno Locks
Journal:  World J Orthod       Date:  2006

5.  Class III camouflage treatment with the Biofunctional technique.

Authors:  Fabricio Pinelli Valarelli; Francisco Eduardo Casaro Nascimento; Déric Meschiari Batista; Karina Maria Salvatore Freitas; Rodrigo Hermont Cançado
Journal:  J Clin Orthod       Date:  2018 Jun-Jul

6.  A study of Class III treatment: orthodontic camouflage vs orthognathic surgery.

Authors:  Katherine Georgalis; Michael G Woods
Journal:  Aust Orthod J       Date:  2015-11

7.  Smile attractiveness in patients with Class II division 1 subdivision malocclusions treated with different tooth extraction protocols.

Authors:  Guilherme Janson; Nuria C Branco; Juliana F Morais; Marcos R Freitas
Journal:  Eur J Orthod       Date:  2011-07-19       Impact factor: 3.075

8.  Preliminary investigation of nonsurgical treatment of severe skeletal Class III malocclusion in the permanent dentition.

Authors:  Jiuxiang Lin; Yan Gu
Journal:  Angle Orthod       Date:  2003-08       Impact factor: 2.079

9.  Incisor inclination and perceived tooth colour changes.

Authors:  Philip Ciucchi; Stavros Kiliaridis
Journal:  Eur J Orthod       Date:  2017-10-01       Impact factor: 3.075

10.  Treatment in Borderline Class III Malocclusion: Orthodontic Camouflage (Extraction) Versus Orthognathic Surgery.

Authors:  A-Bakr M Rabie; Ricky W K Wong; G U Min
Journal:  Open Dent J       Date:  2008-03-08
View more
  2 in total

1.  A novel machine learning model for class III surgery decision.

Authors:  Hunter Lee; Sunna Ahmad; Michael Frazier; Mehmet Murat Dundar; Hakan Turkkahraman
Journal:  J Orofac Orthop       Date:  2022-08-26       Impact factor: 2.341

2.  Effects of sex, age, choice of surgical orthodontic treatment, and skeletal pattern on the psychological assessments of orthodontic patients.

Authors:  Sayaka Hino; Aya Maeda-Iino; Takakazu Yagi; Shoko Nakagawa; Shouichi Miyawaki
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2022-06-01       Impact factor: 4.996

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.