Korean J Orthod.  2023 May;53(3):163-174. 10.4041/kjod22.164.

Perception of discrepancy in the upper midline position in conjunction with the gingival display according to various occupations in Iran

• Najafi HZ
• Estedlal T
• Saki M
• Azadi M

• KMID: 2542811
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.4041/kjod22.164

Abstract

Objective
This study evaluated the influence of various gingival displays on the esthetic perception in the presence of upper dental midline discrepancy. Methods: A smiling image of a male subject was altered digitally to produce five image series: normal smile (series A), decreased tooth show (series B), increased gingival show (series C), maxillary cant (series D), and asymmetric upper lip elevation (series E). In each image series, the midline was deviated to the right and left incrementally. A total of 210 raters (four professional groups and laypersons, n = 42 in each group) determined the midline deviation threshold and the attractiveness of midline position in each series. Results: The right and left thresholds were statistically similar for the symmetrical series (A, B, and C), while for series D, the right threshold was significantly lower. In most rater groups, the mean threshold order was: B > A > E > C > D. In all the series, the raters selected the coincident midline as the most attractive series except for series D, for which 1–2-mm deviations to the left were selected as the most attractive by almost all the groups. Conclusions: It is crucial to establish the coincident midline position in a symmetrical smile, especially when a gummy smile exists. In the asymmetrical gingival show, a coincident midline might not be the most esthetic midline position.

Keyword

Attractiveness; Gingival show; Midline deviation; Threshold

Figure

• 

  Figure 1 Illustration of the digitally modified image series evaluated by the raters.

• 

  Figure 2 Mean attractiveness of different midline deviations in image series as rated by the rater groups. A, Orthodontists. B, Prosthodontists. C, Oral and maxillofacial surgeons. D, Operative dentists. E, Laypeople. Series A, normal; Series B, decreased tooth show; Series C, increased gumminess; Series D, maxillary cant; Series E, asymmetrical lip elevation.

Reference

1. Godinho J, Gonçalves RP, Jardim L. 2020; Contribution of facial components to the attractiveness of the smiling face in male and female patients: a cross-sectional correlation study. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 157:98–104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2019.01.022. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2019.01.022. PMID: 31901288.

2. Flores-Mir C, Silva E, Barriga MI, Lagravere MO, Major PW. 2004; Lay person's perception of smile aesthetics in dental and facial views. J Orthod. 31:204–9. discussion 201https://doi.org/10.1179/146531204225022416. DOI: 10.1179/146531204225022416. PMID: 15489364.

3. Silva BP, Jiménez-Castellanos E, Martinez-de-Fuentes R, Fernandez AA, Chu S. 2015; Perception of maxillary dental midline shift in asymmetric faces. Int J Esthet Dent. 10:588–96. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26794054/. PMID: 26794054.

4. Silva BP, Jiménez-Castellanos E, Martinez-de-Fuentes R, Greenberg JR, Chu S. 2013; Laypersons' perception of facial and dental asymmetries. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 33:e162–71. https://doi.org/10.11607/prd.1618. DOI: 10.11607/prd.1618. PMID: 24116371.

5. Ker AJ, Chan R, Fields HW, Beck M, Rosenstiel S. 2008; Esthetics and smile characteristics from the layperson's perspective: a computer-based survey study. J Am Dent Assoc. 139:1318–27. https://doi.org/10.14219/jada.archive.2008.0043. DOI: 10.14219/jada.archive.2008.0043. PMID: 18832267.

6. Kokich VO, Kokich VG, Kiyak HA. 2006; Perceptions of dental professionals and laypersons to altered dental esthetics: asymmetric and symmetric situations. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 130:141–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2006.04.017. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2006.04.017. PMID: 16905057.

7. Dym H, Pierre R 2nd. 2020; Diagnosis and treatment approaches to a "gummy smile". Dent Clin North Am. 64:341–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cden.2019.12.003. DOI: 10.1016/j.cden.2019.12.003. PMID: 32111273.

8. Hwang WS, Hur MS, Hu KS, Song WC, Koh KS, Baik HS, et al. 2009; Surface anatomy of the lip elevator muscles for the treatment of gummy smile using botulinum toxin. Angle Orthod. 79:70–7. https://doi.org/10.2319/091407-437.1. DOI: 10.2319/091407-437.1. PMID: 19123705.

9. Waldrop TC. 2008; Gummy smiles: the challenge of gingival excess: prevalence and guidelines for clinical management. Semin Orthod. 14:260–71. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.sodo.2008.07.004. DOI: 10.1053/j.sodo.2008.07.004.

10. Ishida Y, Ono T. 2017; Nonsurgical treatment of an adult with a skeletal Class II gummy smile using zygomatic temporary anchorage devices and improved superelastic nickel-titanium alloy wires. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 152:693–705. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2016.09.030. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2016.09.030. PMID: 29103447.

11. Parrini S, Rossini G, Castroflorio T, Fortini A, Deregibus A, Debernardi C. 2016; Laypeople's perceptions of frontal smile esthetics: a systematic review. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 150:740–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2016.06.022. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2016.06.022. PMID: 27871700.

12. An SM, Choi SY, Chung YW, Jang TH, Kang KH. 2014; Comparing esthetic smile perceptions among laypersons with and without orthodontic treatment experience and dentists. Korean J Orthod. 44:294–303. https://doi.org/10.4041/kjod.2014.44.6.294. DOI: 10.4041/kjod.2014.44.6.294. PMID: 25473645. PMCID: PMC4250663.

13. Beyer JW, Lindauer SJ. 1998; Evaluation of dental midline position. Semin Orthod. 4:146–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1073-8746(98)80016-9. DOI: 10.1016/S1073-8746(98)80016-9. PMID: 9807151.

14. Chang CA, Fields HW Jr, Beck FM, Springer NC, Firestone AR, Rosenstiel S, et al. 2011; Smile esthetics from patients' perspectives for faces of varying attractiveness. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 140:e171–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2011.03.022. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2011.03.022. PMID: 21967955.

15. Ferreira JB, Silva LE, Caetano MT, Motta AF, Cury-Saramago AA, Mucha JN. 2016; Perception of midline deviations in smile esthetics by laypersons. Dental Press J Orthod. 21:51–7. https://doi.org/10.1590/2177-6709.21.6.051-057.oar. DOI: 10.1590/2177-6709.21.6.051-057.oar. PMID: 28125140. PMCID: PMC5278933.

16. Johnston CD, Burden DJ, Stevenson MR. 1999; The influence of dental to facial midline discrepancies on dental attractiveness ratings. Eur J Orthod. 21:517–22. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/21.5.517. DOI: 10.1093/ejo/21.5.517. PMID: 10565092.

17. Pinho S, Ciriaco C, Faber J, Lenza MA. 2007; Impact of dental asymmetries on the perception of smile esthetics. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 132:748–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2006.01.039. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2006.01.039. PMID: 18068592.

18. Cracel-Nogueira F, Pinho T. 2013; Assessment of the perception of smile esthetics by laypersons, dental students and dental practitioners. Int Orthod. 11:432–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ortho.2013.09.007. DOI: 10.1016/j.ortho.2013.09.007. PMID: 24427802.

19. Rothas DA. 2008. Evaluation of the maxillary dental midline relative to the face [Master Thesis]. University of North Carolina;Chapel Hill: https://doi.org/10.17615/qmmk-xv57.

20. Sharma N, Rosenstiel SF, Fields HW, Beck FM. 2012; Smile characterization by U.S. white, U.S. Asian Indian, and Indian populations. J Prosthet Dent. 107:327–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(12)60085-7. DOI: 10.1016/S0022-3913(12)60085-7. PMID: 22546311.

21. Shyagali TR, Chandralekha B, Bhayya DP, Kumar S, Balasubramanyam G. 2008; Are ratings of dentofacial attractiveness influenced by dentofacial midline discrepancies? Aust Orthod J. 24:91–5. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19113072/. PMID: 19113072.

22. Springer NC, Chang C, Fields HW, Beck FM, Firestone AR, Rosenstiel S, et al. 2011; Smile esthetics from the layperson's perspective. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 139:e91–101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2010.06.019. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2010.06.019. PMID: 21195262.

23. Williams RP, Rinchuse DJ, Zullo TG. 2014; Perceptions of midline deviations among different facial types. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 145:249–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2013.02.034. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2013.02.034. PMID: 24485740.

24. Zhang YF, Xiao L, Li J, Peng YR, Zhao Z. 2010; Young people's esthetic perception of dental midline deviation. Angle Orthod. 80:515–20. https://doi.org/10.2319/052209-286.1. DOI: 10.2319/052209-286.1. PMID: 20050746. PMCID: PMC8985724.

25. Ngoc VTN, Tran DK, Dung TM, Anh NV, Nga VT, Anh LQ, et al. 2020; Perceptions of dentists and non-professionals on some dental factors affecting smile aesthetics: a study from Vietnam. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 17:1638. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17051638. DOI: 10.3390/ijerph17051638. PMID: 32138374. PMCID: PMC7084949. PMID: a82c7dadb1ff49ddb9b2df0059c7bac2.

26. Kaya B, Uyar R. 2013; Influence on smile attractiveness of the smile arc in conjunction with gingival display. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 144:541–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2013.05.006. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2013.05.006. PMID: 24075662.

27. Alyami AH, Sanea JA, Togoo RA, Ain TS. 2018; Aesthetic perception about gingival display on maxillary incisor inclination among Saudi dentists, orthodontist and lay persons. J Clin Diagn Res. 12:56–60. https://doi.org/10.7860/JCDR/2018/33965.11835. DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2018/33965.11835. PMID: 3c5f595305004168bbaef67a02690b0c.

28. Graber LW, Vanarsdall RL, Vig KWL, Huang GJ. 2017. Orthodontics: current principles and techniques. 6th ed. Elsevier Mosby;Philadelphia: https://www.amazon.com/Orthodontics-Lee-Graber-DDS-PhD/dp/0323378323. DOI: 10.1016/0002-9416(85)90010-7.

29. Proffit WR, Fields HW, Larson B, Sarver DM. 2018. Contemporary orthodontics. 6th ed. Elsevier Health Sciences;Philadelphia: https://shop.elsevier.com/books/contemporary-orthodontics/proffit/978-0-323-54387-3. DOI: 10.1053/j.sodo.2018.10.005.

30. Fernandes L, Pinho T. 2015; Esthetic evaluation of dental and gingival asymmetries. Int Orthod. 13:221–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ortho.2015.03.005. DOI: 10.1016/j.ortho.2015.03.005. PMID: 25986710.

31. Ioi H, Nakata S, Counts AL. 2010; Influence of gingival display on smile aesthetics in Japanese. Eur J Orthod. 32:633–7. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjq013. DOI: 10.1093/ejo/cjq013. PMID: 20403956.

32. Naini FB, Donaldson AN, Cobourne MT, McDonald F. 2012; Assessing the influence of mandibular prominence on perceived attractiveness in the orthognathic patient, clinician, and layperson. Eur J Orthod. 34:738–46. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjr098. DOI: 10.1093/ejo/cjr098. PMID: 21846874.

33. Naini FB, Donaldson AN, McDonald F, Cobourne MT. 2012; Assessing the influence of asymmeftry affecting the mandible and chin point on perceived attractiveness in the orthognathic patient, clinician, and layperson. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 70:192–206. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2010.12.055. DOI: 10.1016/j.joms.2010.12.055. PMID: 21571417.

34. Al-Ansari A, Ellakany P, Fouda S, Al-Sheikh R, El Tantawi M. 2020; Intention to seek esthetic dental treatment and the theory of planned behavior in Saudi dental students and the general population. J Prosthet Dent. 124:774–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2019.07.005. DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2019.07.005. PMID: 31952857.

35. Meyer-Marcotty P, Stellzig-Eisenhauer A. 2009; Dentofacial self-perception and social perception of adults with unilateral cleft lip and palate. J Orofac Orthop. 70:224–36. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00056-009-8813-9. DOI: 10.1007/s00056-009-8813-9. PMID: 19484415.

36. Alhammadi MS, Halboub E, Al-Dumaini AA, Malhan SM, Alfaife F, Otudi J. 2022; Perception of dental, smile and gingival esthetic components by dental specialists, general dental practitioners, dental assistants and laypersons: a cross-sectional study. World J Dent. 13:250–60. https://doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10015-1918. DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10015-1918.

37. Sadrhaghighi H, Zarghami A, Sadrhaghighi S, Eskandarinezhad M. 2017; Esthetic perception of smile components by orthodontists, general dentists, dental students, artists, and laypersons. J Investig Clin Dent. 8:e12235. https://doi.org/10.1111/jicd.12235. DOI: 10.1111/jicd.12235. PMID: 27590143.