Faculty, Staff and Student Publications

Language

English

Publication Date

4-1-2022

Journal

Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery

DOI

10.1016/j.joms.2021.11.016

PMID

34942153

PMCID

PMC8983510

PubMedCentral® Posted Date

4-1-2023

PubMedCentral® Full Text Version

Author MSS

Abstract

Purpose: A facial reference frame is a 3-dimensional Cartesian coordinate system that includes 3 perpendicular planes: midsagittal, axial, and coronal. The order in which one defines the planes matters. The purposes of this study are to determine the following: 1) what sequence (axial-midsagittal-coronal vs midsagittal-axial-coronal) produced more appropriate reference frames and 2) whether orbital or auricular dystopia influenced the outcomes.

Methods: This study is an ambispective cross-sectional study. Fifty-four subjects with facial asymmetry were included. The facial reference frames of each subject (outcome variable) were constructed using 2 methods (independent variable): axial plane first and midsagittal plane first. Two board-certified orthodontists together blindly evaluated the results using a 3-point categorical scale based on their careful inspection and expert intuition. The covariant for stratification was the existence of orbital or auricular dystopia. Finally, Wilcoxon signed rank tests were performed.

Results: The facial reference frames defined by the midsagittal plane first method was statistically significantly different from ones defined by the axial plane first method (P = .001). Using the midsagittal plane first method, the reference frames were more appropriately defined in 22 (40.7%) subjects, equivalent in 26 (48.1%) and less appropriately defined in 6 (11.1%). After stratified by orbital or auricular dystopia, the results also showed that the reference frame computed using midsagittal plane first method was statistically significantly more appropriate in both subject groups regardless of the existence of orbital or auricular dystopia (27 with orbital or auricular dystopia and 27 without, both P < .05).

Conclusions: The midsagittal plane first sequence improves the facial reference frames compared with the traditional axial plane first approach. However, regardless of the sequence used, clinicians need to judge the correctness of the reference frame before diagnosis or surgical planning.

Keywords

Anatomic Landmarks, Computers, Cross-Sectional Studies, Facial Asymmetry, Humans, Imaging, Three-Dimensional, Orthognathic Surgery, Computer-Aided Surgical Simulation, Virtual Surgical Planning, Reference Frame, Cartesian Coordinate System, Midsagittal Plane, Axial Plane, Facial Asymmetry, Orbital Dystopia, Auricular Dystopia

Published Open-Access

yes

Download

Included in

Dentistry Commons

Share

COinS
 
 

To view the content in your browser, please download Adobe Reader or, alternately,
you may Download the file to your hard drive.

NOTE: The latest versions of Adobe Reader do not support viewing PDF files within Firefox on Mac OS and if you are using a modern (Intel) Mac, there is no official plugin for viewing PDF files within the browser window.