The objective of this study was to evaluate the association between nasolabial symmetry and aesthetics in children with complete unilateral cleft lip and palate (CUCLP). Frontal and basal photographs of 60 consecutively treated children with CUCLP (cleft group: 41 boys and 19 girls, mean (SD) age 11 (2) years) and 44 children without clefts (control group: 16 boys and 28 girls, mean (SD) age 11(2) years), were used for evaluation of nasolabial symmetry and aesthetics. Nasal and labial measurements were made to calculate the coefficient of asymmetry (CA). The 5-grade aesthetic index described by Asher-McDade et al. was used to evaluate nasolabial appearance. Correlation and regression analysis were used to identify an association between aesthetics and CA, sex, and the presence of CUCLP. Ten measurements in the cleft, and 2 in the control, group differed significantly between the cleft and non-cleft (or right and left) sides, respectively. The significantly higher values of 9 of 11 CA in the children with CUCLP indicated that they had more asymmetrical nasolabial areas than children without clefts. However, the regression analyses showed that only a few CA were associated with nasolabial aesthetics. In conclusion, nasolabial aesthetics and nasolabial symmetry seem to be only weakly associated in patients with CUCLP.
To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
Purchase one-time access:Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
One-time access price info
- For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
- For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'
Subscribe:Subscribe to British Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery
Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
Already an online subscriber? Sign in
Register: Create an account
Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect
- The psychosocial effects of cleft lip and palate: a systematic review.Eur J Orthod. 2005; 27: 274-285
- Attractiveness of facial averageness and symmetry in non-western cultures: in search of biologically based standards of beauty.Perception. 2001; 30: 611-625
- Putative golden proportions as predictors of facial esthetics in adolescents.Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2008; 134: 480-483
- Facial esthetics in adolescents and its relationship to “ideal” ratios and angles.Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2008; 133: e1-e8
- Averageness or symmetry: which is more important for facial attractiveness?.Acta Psychol (Amst). 2009; 131: 136-142
- Nasolabial esthetics in children with complete unilateral cleft lip and palate after 1- versus 3-stage treatment protocols.J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2009; 67: 1661-1666
- Development of a method for rating nasolabial appearance in patients with clefts of the lip and palate.Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 1991; 28: 385-390
- Anthropometric and anthroposcopic findings of the nasal and facial region in cleft patients before and after primary lip and palate repair.Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 1993; 30: 1-12
- Three-dimensional analysis of the child cleft face.Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2000; 37: 137-144
- Triangular with Ala nasi (TAN) repair of unilateral cleft lips: a personal technique and early outcomes.J Craniofac Surg. 2007; 18: 186-197
- A computer-based method of measuring facial asymmetry. Results from an assessment of the repair of cleft lip deformities.Br J Plast Surg. 1987; 40: 371-376
- Effects of different surgical regimes on nasal asymmetry and facial attractiveness in patients with clefts of the lip and palate.Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 1991; 28: 274-278
- Nasal morphology and shape parameters as predictors of nasal esthetics in individuals with complete unilateral cleft lip and palate.Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2001; 38: 476-485
- Correlation between facial morphology and esthetics in patients with repaired complete unilateral cleft lip and palate.Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2009; 46: 319-325
- Persons with cleft lip and palate are looked at differently.J Dent Res. 2010; 89: 400-404
Published online: January 16, 2012
Accepted: November 28, 2011
© 2011 The British Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.