Anthropometric Analysis Supported by Digital Simulation in Turkish Rhinoplasty Patients
Abstract
Objective: Three-dimensional (3D) simulation analyses used to evaluate nasal morphology support the surgeon’s visual assessment using digital measurements. This study aimed to perform a 3D simulation-supported anthropometric analysis of nasal structures in Turkish patients presenting for rhinoplasty, compare the obtained data with established aesthetic norms, and examine correlations between nasal anthropometric measurements.
Materials and Methods: A total of 315 patients (257 females, 58 males) aged 18–65 years who presented for primary rhinoplasty were included. Interpupillary distances were measured manually and integrated into the Crisalix (Crisalix SA, Switzerland) 3D simulation system. The nasofrontal angle, nasolabial angle, nasal bridge length, alar width, and nasal projection parameters were recorded and analyzed.
Results: The mean interpupillary distance was 6.23 ± 0.18 cm in males and 6.10 ± 0.26 cm in females. The mean anthropometric values were 151.44° ± 6.27° for the nasofrontal angle, 111.89° ± 10.97° for the nasolabial angle, 4.53 ± 0.33 cm for nasal bridge length, 5.80 ± 0.41 cm for alar width, and 2.88 ± 0.29 cm for nasal projection. Nasal bridge length, alar width, and nasal projection were higher in males than in females, whereas no significant difference was found in angular measurements. Strong positive correlations were observed between the parameters.
Conclusion: This study provides patient-centered three-dimensional anthropometric data for Turkish individuals seeking rhinoplasty. The use of 3D analysis systems may support traditional subjective and two-dimensional surgical assessments with objective digital measurements, thereby improving the predictability of preoperative planning and facilitating individualized, patient-centered approaches.
Keywords
3-D imaging, anthropometry, rhinoplasty
Supporting Institution
No financial or material support was received for this study.
Ethical Statement
The study protocol was approved by the Institutional Ethics Committee (Approval No: 202509Y0932/2025). All procedures were performed in accordance with the ethical standards of the Declaration of Helsinki. Written informed consent was obtained from all patients for participation in the study and for the use of their photographs and 3D images for scientific purposes.
References
- Piombino P, Zace P, Grassia MG, et al. Anthropometric Parameters for Nose Evaluation and Nasal Surgery Planning. J Craniofac Surg. 2020;31:1620-1624.
- Doddi NM, Eccles R. The role of anthropometric measurements in nasal surgery and research: a systematic review. Clin Otolaryngol. 2010;35:277-283.
- Celikoyar MM, Pérez MF, Akbaş MI, et al. Facial Surface Anthropometric Features and Measurements With an Emphasis on Rhinoplasty. Aesthet Surg J. 2022;42:133-148.
- Pallanch J. Introduction to 3D imaging technologies for the facial plastic surgeon. Facial Plast Surg Clin North Am. 2011;19:xv-xvi, vii.
- Toriumi DM. Commentary on: Facial Surface Anthropometric Features and Measurements With an Emphasis on Rhinoplasty. Aesthet Surg J. 2022;42:149-150.
- Moscatiello F, Herrero Jover J, González Ballester MA, et al. Preoperative digital three-dimensional planning for rhinoplasty. Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2010;34:232-238.
- Yamamichi K, Nakanishi Y, Chen CY. Three-Dimensional Simulation Accuracy and Patient Satisfaction With Rhinoplasty. Aesthet Surg J Open Forum. 2025;7:ojaf110.
- Carvalho B, Ballin AC, Becker RV, et al. Rhinoplasty and facial asymmetry: Analysis of subjective and anthropometric factors in the Caucasian nose. Int Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2012;16:445-451.
- Altinkaya A. Nasal Anthropometric Analysis in Turkish Rhinoplasty Patients. J Craniofac Surg. 2023;34:267-271.
- Amodeo CA. The central role of the nose in the face and the psyche: review of the nose and the psyche. Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2007;31:406-410.