Yüz Maskesi Tedavisi Sonrası Burun Ucu Rotasyonu ve Projeksiyonun Değerlendirilmesi

Year 2025, Volume: 26 Issue: 3, 271 - 277, 22.09.2025

Özge Ünlüoğlu , Mine Geçgelen Cesur

https://doi.org/10.69601/meandrosmdj.1641545

Abstract

Amaç: Bu retrospektif çalışma, maksiller retrüzyon ile karakterize Sınıf III maloklüzyona sahip prepubertal hastalarda yüz maskesi tedavisinin burun ucu projeksiyonu ve rotasyonu üzerindeki etkilerini değerlendirmeyi amaçlamaktadır.
Gereç ve Yöntem: Çalışmaya, Aydın Adnan Menderes Üniversitesi Ortodonti Anabilim Dalı’nda yüz maskesi tedavisi görmüş, yaş ortalaması 8.34 ± 0.83 olan 32 hasta (12 kadın, 21 erkek) dahil edilmiştir. Tedavi öncesi (T0) ve tedavi bitiminden 3 ay sonra (T1) sefalometrik radyografiler alınmıştır. Burun ucu projeksiyonu Goode yöntemi ile, burun ucu rotasyonu ise nazolabial açı ölçümleriyle değerlendirilmiştir.
Bulgular: Tedavi sonrası burun yüksekliği ve uzunluğunda istatiksel olarak anlamlı bir artış olduğu (p < 0.001), ancak nazolabial açı ve Goode oranında istatiksel olarak anlamlı bir değişiklik olmadığı tespit edilmiştir (p > 0.05). Kadınlarda ve erkeklerde T1 zamanı ölçülen burun yüksekliği ve burun uzunluğu ölçümleri T0 zamanı ölçülen değerlerden istatistiksel olarak anlamlı düzeyde daha yüksek bulunmuştur (p=0.002, p=0.001). Çalışmanın korelasyon analizi bulgularına göre, T0 zamanı burun uzunluğu ile T0 zamanı Goode oranı (r=0.613, p<0.001) ve T1 zamanı burun yüksekliği ile T1 zamanı Goode Oranı (r=0.721, p<0.001) arasında güçlü pozitif ilişkiler olduğu tespit edilmiştir.
Sonuç: Bu çalışmanın sonuçları, yüz maskesi tedavisinin burun yapısındaki bazı morfolojik değişiklikleri desteklediğini, ancak yumuşak doku estetiği üzerinde sınırlı etkisi olduğunu ortaya koymaktadır.

Keywords

Yüz Maskesi , Goode yöntemi , Nazolabial açı

Evaluation of Nasal Tip Rotation and Projection Following Facemask Therapy

Abstract

Purpose: This study conducted retrospectively aims to assess the impact of facemask therapy on nasal tip projection and rotation in prepubertal patients with Class III malocclusion associated by maxillary deficiency.
Materials and Methods: The retrospective study included 32 patients (21 males, 12 females) with an average age of 8.34 ± 0.83, who received facemask therapy at Aydın Adnan Menderes University’s Department of Orthodontics. Cephalometric radiographs were obtained pretreatment (T0) and 3 months posttreatment (T1). Nasal tip projection analysis was by the Goode method, while the rotation of the nasal tip was assessed through nasolabial angle measurements.
Results: An increase that is statistically meaningful in nasal height and length was observed post-treatment (p < 0.001), whereas no meaningful difference was observed in the nasolabial angle and Goode ratio (p > 0.05). In both females and males, nasal height and length measurements at T1 were elevated compared to the values measured at T0 (p = 0.002, p = 0.001). Based on the study’s correlation analysis findings, strong positive correlations were identified between nasal length at T0 and the Goode ratio at T0 (r=0.613, p<0.001), and among nasal height at T1 and the Goode ratio at T1 (r=0.721, p<0.001).
Conclusion: The outcomes of our study demonstrate that facemask therapy supports some morphological changes in the nasal structure but has limited effects on soft tissue aesthetics.
Key words: Facemask, Goode method, Nasolabial angle

Keywords

Facemask , Goode method , nasolabial angle

References

• 1. Ellis E, McNamara JA. Components of adult class III malocclusion. Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery. 1984 May;42(5):295–305.
• 2. De Clerck HJ, Cornelis MA, Cevidanes LH, Heymann GC, Tulloch CJF. Orthopedic traction of the maxilla with miniplates: a new perspective for treatment of midface deficiency. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2009 Oct;67(10):2123–9.
• 3. Sperry TP, Speidel TM, Isaacson RJ, Worms FW. The role of dental compensations in the orthodontic treatment of mandibular prognathism. Angle Orthod. 1977 Oct;47(4):293–9.
• 4. Ngan P, Hägg U, Yiu C, Merwin D, Wei SHY. Soft tissue and dentoskeletal profile changes associated with maxillary expansion and protraction headgear treatment. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics. 1996 Jan;109(1):38–49.
• 5. Kiliçoĝlu H, Kirliç Y. Profile changes in patients with class III malocclusions after delaire mask therapy. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics. 1998 Apr;113(4):453–62.
• 6. Jang Y, Chung D, Lee J, Lee S, Park JH. A comparative evaluation of midfacial soft tissue and nasal bone changes with two maxillary protraction protocols: Tooth‐borne vs skeletal‐anchored facemasks. Orthod Craniofac Res. 2021 Mar 5;24(S1):5–12.
• 7. Crumley RL, Lanser M. Quantitative analysis of nasal tip projection. Laryngoscope. 1988 Feb 4;98(2):202–8.
• 8. Goode R. A method of tip projection measurement. In: Powell N, Humphrey B, editors. Proportions of Aesthetic Face. New York: Thieme-Stratton; 1984. p. 15–39.
• 9. Nolst Trenite G. Aesthethics. In: Rhinoplasty: A Practical Guide to Functional and Aesthetic Surgery of the Nose. The Hague, The Netherlands: Kugler Publications; 1998. p. 13–7.
• 10. Kılınç DD, Sayar G. Evaluation of Nasal Tip Projection and Rotation of Nasal Tip after Orthognathic Surgery by Using Goode’s Method. J Maxillofac Oral Surg. 2022 Jun 25;21(2):510–4.
• 11. Hassel B, Farman AG. Skeletal maturation evaluation using cervical vertebrae. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1995 Jan;107(1):58–66.
• 12. Naini F. Facial Aesthetics: Concepts and Clinical Diagnosis. Wiley-Blackwell; 2011.
• 13. Quinzi V, Paskay LC, D’Andrea N, Albani A, Monaco A, Saccomanno S. Evaluation of the Nasolabial Angle in Orthodontic Diagnosis: A Systematic Review. Applied Sciences. 2021 Mar 12;11(6):2531.
• 14. Soylu S, Coban G, Ozturk T, Cengiz S. Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Orthopedic Face Mask Treatment Using Artificial Intelligence on Two-Dimensional Photographs. Orthodontic Forum. 2023;19(3):77–83.
• 15. Celikoglu M, Yavuz I, Unal T, Oktay H, Erdem A. Comparison of the soft and hard tissue effects of two different protraction mechanisms in class III patients: a randomized clinical trial. Clin Oral Investig. 2015 Nov 25;19(8):2115–22.
• 16. Xu FY, Kwon TG, Rong H, Kyung HM, Bing L, Wu XP. Morphological Changes of Skeletal Class III Malocclusion in Mixed Dentition with Protraction Combined Activities. International Journal of Morphology. 2018 Jun;36(2):430–4.
• 17. Nanda RS, Meng H, Kapila S, Goorhuis J. Growth changes in the soft tissue facial profile. Angle Orthod. 1990;60(3):177–90.
• 18. Yavuz I, Halicioğlu K, Ceylan I. Face mask therapy effects in two skeletal maturation groups of female subjects with skeletal Class III malocclusions. Angle Orthod. 2009 Sep;79(5):842–8.
• 19. Kim JH, Viana MAG, Graber TM, Omerza FF, BeGole EA. The effectiveness of protraction face mask therapy: A meta-analysis. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics. 1999 Jun;115(6):675–85.
• 20. Menéndez‐Díaz I, Muriel J, Cobo JL, Álvarez C, Cobo T. Early treatment of <scp>C</scp> lass <scp>III</scp> malocclusion with facemask therapy. Clin Exp Dent Res. 2018 Dec 18;4(6):279–83.
• 21. Mandall N, Cousley R, DiBiase A, Dyer F, Littlewood S, Mattick R, et al. Early class III protraction facemask treatment reduces the need for orthognathic surgery: a multi-centre, two-arm parallel randomized, controlled trial. J Orthod. 2016 Jul 2;43(3):164–75.
• 22. Turner F, Zanaret M, Giovanni A. Evaluation of nasal tip projection. Fr ORL. 2007;92(7):282–7.
• 23. Reyneke J, Ferretti C. Clinical Assesment of the Face. Semin Orthod. 2012;18:172–86.
• 24. Ingels K, Orhan KS. Measurement of Preoperative and Postoperative Nasal Tip Projection and Rotation. Arch Facial Plast Surg. 2006 Nov 1;8(6):411–5.
• 25. ElBestar MF, AlMahdy AY, Gharib FM. Assessment of nasal tip projection. The Egyptian Journal of Otolaryngology. 2015 Apr 30;31(2):105–10.
• 26. Ahmed O, Dhinsa A, Popenko N, Osann K, Crumley RL, Wong BJ. Population-Based Assessment of Currently Proposed Ideals of Nasal Tip Projection and Rotation in Young Women. JAMA Facial Plast Surg. 2014 Sep;16(5):310–8.