The Application of the Divine Proportion for the Construction of the Visualized Treatment Objective in Craniofacial Surgery.
Journal
The Journal of craniofacial surgery
ISSN: 1536-3732
Titre abrégé: J Craniofac Surg
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 9010410
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Historique:
pubmed:
1
7
2021
medline:
5
11
2021
entrez:
30
6
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Aesthetics and function of maxillofacial district are closely related and could interfere with patient psychological conditions. The aim of this paper is to describe and to analyze the procedures necessary for a proper surgical visualized treatment objective (VTO) realization through the use of the tracing on lateral head film, applying the divine proportion (or golden ratio) in certain steps. The method described is easy to realize, cheap and help both orthodontist and maxillo-facial surgeon to communicate each other and to the patients.For the following article, digital research and handheld research on surgical VTO planning for patients with skeletal or dentoalveolar severe deformities managed by surgeons and orthodontics were used. The research included articles in English published on dental and maxillofacial surgery journals.The surgical VTO consists of a "previsualization" of the objectives in order to make the desired changes for the individual patient. The result can thus be visualized and pre-evaluated rather than just imagined by the mind's eye. To simplify the procedure, the surgical VTO has been divided into 11 steps. The accurate model of the surgical result is fundamental in the treatment of dentofacial deformities. These predictions are intended to guide the treatment towards the desired result, to give the patient a reasonable preview of the outcome, and to ensure communication between the orthodontist and the surgeon.This technique proves to be effective in planning surgical treatment and it allows the clinician to view changes before, during, and after orthognathic surgery. The skeletal, dental, and aesthetic complete cephalometric evaluation is the key point to the long-term success of the results.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34191768
doi: 10.1097/SCS.0000000000007754
pii: 00001665-202112000-00013
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
2603-2610Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2021 by Mutaz B. Habal, MD.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors report no conflicts of interest.
Références
Ricketts RM. Provocation and Perceptions in Cranio-Facial Orthopedics. Vol 1. 1st ed.USA: Rocky Mountain Orthodontics; 1989.
Ricketts RM. The golden divider. J Clin Orthodon 1981; 15:752–759.
Ricketts RM. The Divine Proportion: A New Movement in Orthodontics. Proceedings of the Foundation for Orthodontic Research. Ann Arbor, MI: ELS Lithographics, 1980-81
Nattrass C, Sandy JR. Adult orthodontics--a review. Br J Orthod 1995; 22:331–337.
Proffit WR, White RP Jr. Who needs surgical-orthodontic treatment? Int J Adult Orthodon Orthognath Surg 1990; 5:81–89.
Sambataro S, Fastuca R, Oppermann NJ, et al. Cephalometric changes in growing patients with increased vertical dimension treated with cervical headgear. J Orofac Orthop 2017; 78:312–320.
Sambataro S, Lorusso P, Caprioglio A, et al. Changes of occlusal plane in growing patients with increased vertical dimension during class II correction by using cervical headgear. J Craniofac Surg 2020; 31:172–177.
Sambataro S, Bocchieri S, Bafumi L, et al. Elastics selector gauge as orthodontics device applied to inter-maxillary traction during malocclusion correction. J Funct Morphol Kinesiol 2019; 4:63.
Sambataro S, Cervino G, Fiorillo L, et al. Upper first premolar positioning evaluation for the stability of the dental occlusion: anatomical considerations. J Craniofac Surg 2018; 29:1366–1369.
Militi A, Cicciu M, Sambataro S, et al. Dental occlusion and sport performance. Minerva Stomatol 2020; 69:112–118.
Sambataro S, Bocchieri S, Cervino G, et al. Correlations between malocclusion and postural anomalies in children with mixed dentition. J Funct Morphol Kinesiol 2019; 4:45.
Sambataro S, Cervino G, Bocchieri S, et al. TMJ dysfunctions systemic implications and postural assessments: a review of recent literature. J Funct Morphol Kinesiol 2019; 4:58.
Gossett CB, Preston CB, Dunford R, et al. Prediction accuracy of computer-assisted surgical visual treatment objectives as compared with conventional visual treatment objectives. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2005; 63:609–617.
Musich DR. Graber TM, Vanarsdall RL. Orthodontics orthognathic surgery: Principles of combined treatment. Orthodontics: current principles and techniques. St Louis: Mosby Year Book; 1994. 838–841.
Proffit WR, Turvey TA, Phillips C. Orthognathic surgery: a hierarchy of stability. Int J Adult Orthodon Orthognath Surg 1996; 11:191–204.
Olson RE, Laskin DM. Expectations of patients from orthognathic surgery. J Oral Surg 1980; 38:283–285.
Finlay PM, Atkinson JM, Moos KF. Orthognathic surgery: patient expectations; psychological profile and satisfaction with outcome. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1995; 33:9–14.
Athanasiou AE, Melsen B, Eriksen J. Concerns, motivation, and experience of orthognathic surgery patients: a retrospective study of 152 patients. Int J Adult Orthodon Orthognath Surg 1989; 4:47–55.
Williams DM, Bentley R, Cobourne MT, et al. Psychological characteristics of women who require orthognathic surgery: comparison with untreated controls. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2009; 47:191–195.
Kivak HABR. Psychosocial considerations in surgery and orthodontics. Surg Orthodont Treatment 1991; 32:481–507.
Lazaridou-Terzoudi T, Kiyak HA, Moore R, et al. Long-term assessment of psychologic outcomes of orthognathic surgery. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2003; 61:545–552.
Scott AA, Hatch JP, Rugh JD, et al. Psychosocial predictors of satisfaction among orthognathic surgery patients. Int J Adult Orthodon Orthognath Surg 2000; 15:7–15.
Hugo B, Becker S, Witt E. Assessment of the combined orthodontic-surgical treatment from the patients’ point of view. A longitudinal study. J Orofac Orthop 1996; 57:88–101.
Kolokitha OE, Topouzelis N. Cephalometric methods of prediction in orthognathic surgery. J Maxillofac Oral Surg 2011; 10:236–245.
Ricketts RM. Understanding the VTO: Its Construction and Mechanics for Execution. Vol 1. USA: American Institute for Bioprogressive Education; 1998.
Khamashta-Ledezma L, Naini FB, Manisali M. Review of nasal changes with maxillary orthognathic surgery. J Istanb Univ Fac Dent 2017; 51: (3 Suppl 1): S52–S61.
Gandhi VMF. Orthognathic surgery and facial changes - a review. J Orthod Endod 2018; 4:1.
Cecil C, Steiner DDS. Cephalometrics in clinical practice. Angle Orthod 1959; 29:8–29.
Tweed C. Indications for the extraction of teeth in orthodontic procedure. Am J Orthodont Oral Surg 1944; 30:405–428.
Downs WB. Analysis of the dentofacial profile. Angle Orthod 1956; 26:191–212.
Tweed CH. The frankfort-mandibular plane angle in orthodontic diagnosis, classification, treatment planning, and prognosis. Am J Orthod Oral Surg 1946; 32:175–230.
Caroline K. Gender and the physiognomy of dominance and attractiveness. Soc Psychol Q 1985; 48:61–70.
Giddon DB. Orthodontic applications of psychological and perceptual studies of facial esthetics. Semin Orthod 1995; 1:82–93.
Tatarunaite E, Playle R, Hood K, et al. Facial attractiveness: a longitudinal study. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2005; 127:676–682.
Terry RL. Further evidence on components of facial attractiveness. Percept Mot Skills 1977; 45:130–1130.
Terry RL. Further evidence on components offacial attractiveness. Percept Mot Skills 1977; 45:130.
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc, Alley TR, Hildebrandt(-Karraker) KA. Alley TR. Determinants and consequences of facial aesthetics. Resources for ecological psychology. Social and applied aspects of perceiving faces 1988. 101–140.
Springer-Verlag Publishing, Bull R, Rumsey N. Springer series in social psychology. The social psychology of facial appearance. 1988.
Edler RJ. Background considerations to facial aesthetics. J Orthod 2001; 28:159–168.
Hernandez-Alfaro F. Upper incisor to soft tissue plane (UI-STP): a new reference for diagnosis and planning in dentofacial deformities. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal 2010; 15:e779–e781.
Wolford LM, Chemello PD, Hilliard FW. Occlusal plane alteration in orthognathic surgery. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1993; 51:730–740.
Arnett GW, Bergman RT. Facial keys to orthodontic diagnosis and treatment planning. Part I. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1993; 103:299–312.
Arnett GW, Bergman RT. Facial keys to orthodontic diagnosis and treatment planning--part II. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1993; 103:395–411.
Arnett GW, Jelic JS, Kim J, et al. Soft tissue cephalometric analysis: diagnosis and treatment planning of dentofacial deformity. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1999; 116:239–253.
Den F, Den F, D’Emidio MM, et al. Surgery-first: a new approach to orthognathic surgery. Oral Implantol (Rome) 2016; 9: (Suppl 1/2016 to N 4/2016): 98–102.
Riad El, Asmar RA, Ghoubril J, et al. Evaluation of the ideal position of the maxillary incisor relative to upper lip thickness. Am J Orthodont Dentofac Orthop 2020; 158:264–272.
Ricketts RM. Divine proportion in facial esthetics. Clin Plast Surg 1982; 9:401–422.
Yu HB, Mao LX, Wang XD, et al. The surgery-first approach in orthognathic surgery: a retrospective study of 50 cases. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2015; 44:1463–1467.
Uribe F, Agarwal S, Shafer D, et al. Increasing orthodontic and orthognathic surgery treatment efficiency with a modified surgery-first approach. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2015; 148:838–848.
Uribe F, Adabi S, Janakiraman N, et al. Treatment duration and factors associated with the surgery-first approach: a two-center study. Prog Orthod 2015; 16:29.
Liou EJ, Chen PH, Wang YC, et al. Surgery-first accelerated orthognathic surgery: postoperative rapid orthodontic tooth movement. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2011; 69:781–785.
Ko EW, Hsu SS, Hsieh HY, et al. Comparison of progressive cephalometric changes and postsurgical stability of skeletal class III correction with and without presurgical orthodontic treatment. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2011; 69:1469–1477.
Ko EW, Lin SC, Chen YR, et al. Skeletal and dental variables related to the stability of orthognathic surgery in skeletal class III malocclusion with a surgery-first approach. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2013; 71:e215–e223.
Park KH, Sandor GK, Kim YD. Skeletal stability of surgery-first bimaxillary orthognathic surgery for skeletal class III malocclusion, using standardized criteria. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2016; 45:35–40.
Cicciù M, Cervino G, Terranova A, et al. Prosthetic and mechanical parameters of the facial bone under the load of different dental implant shapes: a parametric study. Prosthesis 2019; 1:41–53.
D’Amico C, Bocchieri S, Sambataro S, et al. Occlusal load considerations in implant-supported fixed restorations. Prosthesis 2020; 2:252–265.
Ortensi L, Vitali T, Bonfiglioli R, et al. New tricks in the preparation design for prosthetic ceramic laminate veeners. Prosthesis 2019; 1:29–40.