Comparison of different midsagittal plane configurations for evaluating craniofacial asymmetry by expert preference

Sang In An, Ji Yeon Lee, Chooryung J. Chung, Kyung Ho Kim

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

Introduction In this study, we aimed to compare 8 candidate midsagittal planes (MSPs) constructed from different median landmarks to determine the most appropriate one for evaluating craniofacial asymmetry. Methods We included 30 patients (18 men, 12 women; mean age, 25.7 ± 6.03 years) who visited the National Health Insurance Service Ilsan Hospital in Gyeonggi-do, Korea, with a complaint of facial asymmetry. Four MSPs passing through 2 median landmarks perpendicular to the Frankfort horizontal plane and 4 other MSPs passing through 3 median landmarks were constructed. Menton, anterior nasal spine, and anterior nasal spine-to-posterior nasal spine line deviations were evaluated using these 8 MSPs. Eight MSPs from 30 subjects were shown to 6 experts, who selected the planes that they considered the most appropriate. Results Experts most frequently selected the plane passing through nasion and basion perpendicular to the Frankfort horizontal plane (66 of 180 times; P <0.05). In evaluating craniofacial asymmetry, using MSPs passing through 3 median landmarks in the cranial base can lead to underestimation of the asymmetry of the menton, anterior nasal spine, and anterior nasal spine-to-posterior nasal spine line. Conclusions We suggest using MSPs perpendicular to the Frankfort horizontal plane or a plane passing through anterior nasal spine in clinical practice.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)788-797
Number of pages10
JournalAmerican Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics
Volume152
Issue number6
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2017 Dec

Fingerprint

Nose
Spine
National Health Programs
Facial Asymmetry
Skull Base
Korea

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Orthodontics

Cite this

@article{0c0734f25d11469ab5cfbf6110bbb403,
title = "Comparison of different midsagittal plane configurations for evaluating craniofacial asymmetry by expert preference",
abstract = "Introduction In this study, we aimed to compare 8 candidate midsagittal planes (MSPs) constructed from different median landmarks to determine the most appropriate one for evaluating craniofacial asymmetry. Methods We included 30 patients (18 men, 12 women; mean age, 25.7 ± 6.03 years) who visited the National Health Insurance Service Ilsan Hospital in Gyeonggi-do, Korea, with a complaint of facial asymmetry. Four MSPs passing through 2 median landmarks perpendicular to the Frankfort horizontal plane and 4 other MSPs passing through 3 median landmarks were constructed. Menton, anterior nasal spine, and anterior nasal spine-to-posterior nasal spine line deviations were evaluated using these 8 MSPs. Eight MSPs from 30 subjects were shown to 6 experts, who selected the planes that they considered the most appropriate. Results Experts most frequently selected the plane passing through nasion and basion perpendicular to the Frankfort horizontal plane (66 of 180 times; P <0.05). In evaluating craniofacial asymmetry, using MSPs passing through 3 median landmarks in the cranial base can lead to underestimation of the asymmetry of the menton, anterior nasal spine, and anterior nasal spine-to-posterior nasal spine line. Conclusions We suggest using MSPs perpendicular to the Frankfort horizontal plane or a plane passing through anterior nasal spine in clinical practice.",
author = "An, {Sang In} and Lee, {Ji Yeon} and Chung, {Chooryung J.} and Kim, {Kyung Ho}",
year = "2017",
month = "12",
doi = "10.1016/j.ajodo.2017.04.024",
language = "English",
volume = "152",
pages = "788--797",
journal = "American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics",
issn = "0889-5406",
publisher = "Mosby Inc.",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparison of different midsagittal plane configurations for evaluating craniofacial asymmetry by expert preference

AU - An, Sang In

AU - Lee, Ji Yeon

AU - Chung, Chooryung J.

AU - Kim, Kyung Ho

PY - 2017/12

Y1 - 2017/12

N2 - Introduction In this study, we aimed to compare 8 candidate midsagittal planes (MSPs) constructed from different median landmarks to determine the most appropriate one for evaluating craniofacial asymmetry. Methods We included 30 patients (18 men, 12 women; mean age, 25.7 ± 6.03 years) who visited the National Health Insurance Service Ilsan Hospital in Gyeonggi-do, Korea, with a complaint of facial asymmetry. Four MSPs passing through 2 median landmarks perpendicular to the Frankfort horizontal plane and 4 other MSPs passing through 3 median landmarks were constructed. Menton, anterior nasal spine, and anterior nasal spine-to-posterior nasal spine line deviations were evaluated using these 8 MSPs. Eight MSPs from 30 subjects were shown to 6 experts, who selected the planes that they considered the most appropriate. Results Experts most frequently selected the plane passing through nasion and basion perpendicular to the Frankfort horizontal plane (66 of 180 times; P <0.05). In evaluating craniofacial asymmetry, using MSPs passing through 3 median landmarks in the cranial base can lead to underestimation of the asymmetry of the menton, anterior nasal spine, and anterior nasal spine-to-posterior nasal spine line. Conclusions We suggest using MSPs perpendicular to the Frankfort horizontal plane or a plane passing through anterior nasal spine in clinical practice.

AB - Introduction In this study, we aimed to compare 8 candidate midsagittal planes (MSPs) constructed from different median landmarks to determine the most appropriate one for evaluating craniofacial asymmetry. Methods We included 30 patients (18 men, 12 women; mean age, 25.7 ± 6.03 years) who visited the National Health Insurance Service Ilsan Hospital in Gyeonggi-do, Korea, with a complaint of facial asymmetry. Four MSPs passing through 2 median landmarks perpendicular to the Frankfort horizontal plane and 4 other MSPs passing through 3 median landmarks were constructed. Menton, anterior nasal spine, and anterior nasal spine-to-posterior nasal spine line deviations were evaluated using these 8 MSPs. Eight MSPs from 30 subjects were shown to 6 experts, who selected the planes that they considered the most appropriate. Results Experts most frequently selected the plane passing through nasion and basion perpendicular to the Frankfort horizontal plane (66 of 180 times; P <0.05). In evaluating craniofacial asymmetry, using MSPs passing through 3 median landmarks in the cranial base can lead to underestimation of the asymmetry of the menton, anterior nasal spine, and anterior nasal spine-to-posterior nasal spine line. Conclusions We suggest using MSPs perpendicular to the Frankfort horizontal plane or a plane passing through anterior nasal spine in clinical practice.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85035076559&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85035076559&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.ajodo.2017.04.024

DO - 10.1016/j.ajodo.2017.04.024

M3 - Article

C2 - 29173858

AN - SCOPUS:85035076559

VL - 152

SP - 788

EP - 797

JO - American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics

JF - American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics

SN - 0889-5406

IS - 6

ER -