Advertisement

Aesthetic Plastic Surgery

, Volume 33, Issue 2, pp 175–184 | Cite as

Photographic Facial Soft Tissue Analysis of Healthy Turkish Young Adults: Anthropometric Measurements

  • Senem Turan Ozdemir
  • Deniz Sigirli
  • Ilker Ercan
  • N. Simsek  Cankur
Original Article

Abstract

Background

The purpose of this study was to establish facial soft tissue norms for Turkish young adults.

Methods

Anthropometric measurements of the facial soft tissue were taken from 281 female and 149 male Turkish adults aged between 18 and 24 years. The soft tissue facial profiles were digitally analyzed using linear (17 vertical and 10 horizontal) measurements made with standardized photographic records, taken in a natural head position, to determine the average soft tissue facial profile for males and females.

Results

A statistically significant difference was found between males and females in 20 of 27 measurements taken (p < 0.001). The most prominent differences between the sexes were observed in the measurements taken from the face region. Results were compared with other ethnic groups.

Keywords

Craniofacial Face Measurements Anthropometry Photogrammetry 

Notes

Acknowledgment

This work was supported by the Uludag University Research Foundation (Grant No. 2004/62).

References

  1. 1.
    Baik HS, Jeon JM, Lee HJ (2007) Facial soft-tissue analysis of Korean adults with normal occlusion using a 3-dimensional laser scanner. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 131:759–766PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Fariaby J, Hossini A, Saffari E (2006) Photographic analysis of faces of 20-year-old students in Iran. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 44:393–406PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Fernández-Riveiro P, Suárez-Quintanilla D, Smyth-Chamosa E, Suárez-Cunqueiro M (2002) Linear photogrammetric analysis of the soft tissue facial profile. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 122:59–66PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Fernández-Riveiro P, Smyth-Chamosa E, Suárez-Quintanilla D, Suárez-Cunqueiro M (2003) Angular photogrammetric analysis of the soft tissue facial profile. Eur J Orthod 25:393–399PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ferrario VF, Sforza C, Serrao G (2000) A three-dimensional quantitative analysis of lips in normal young adults. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 37:48–54PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Milosević SA, Varga ML, Slaj M (2008) Analysis of the soft tissue facial profile of Croatians using of linear measurements. J Craniofac Surg 19:251–258PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Nagle E, Teibe U, Kapoka D (2005) Craniofacial anthropometry in a group of healthy Latvian residents. Acta Med Lituanica 12:47–53Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Porter JP, Olson KL (2001) Anthropometric facial analysis of the African American woman. Arch Facial Plast Surg 3:191–197PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Porter JP (2004) The average African American male face: an anthropometric analysis. Arch Facial Plast Surg 6:78–81PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Sforza C, Dimaggio FR, Dellavia C, Grandi G, Ferrario VF (2007) Two-dimensional vs three-dimensional assessment of soft tissue facial profile: a non invasive study in 6-year-old healthy children. Minerva Stomatol 56:253–265PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bozkir MG, Karakas P, Oguz O (2004) Vertical and horizontal neoclassical facial canons in Turkish young adults. Surg Radiol Anat 26:212–219PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Choe KS, Sclafani AP, Litner JA, Yu GP, Romo T 3rd (2004) The Korean American woman’s face: anthropometric measurements and quantitative analysis of facial aesthetics. Arch Facial Plast Surg 6:244–252PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Farkas LG, Katic MJ, Forrest CR, Alt KW, Bagic I, Baltadjiev G, Cunha E, Cvicelová M, Davies S, Erasmus I, Gillett-Netting R, Hajnis K, Kemkes-Grottenthaler A, Khomyakova I, Kumi A, Kgamphe JS, Kayo-daigo N, Le T, Malinowski A, Negasheva M, Manolis S, Ogetürk M, Parvizrad R, Rösing F, Sahu P, Sforza C, Sivkov S, Sultanova N, Tomazo-Ravnik T, Tóth G, Uzun A, Yahia E (2005) International anthropometric study of facial morphology in various ethnic groups/races. J Craniofacial Surg 16:615–646CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Sforza C, Laino A, D’Alessio R, Grandi G, Dellavia C, Tartaglia GM, Ferrario VF (2007) Three-dimensional facial morphometry of attractive Italian women. Prog Orthod 8:282–293PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Sforza C, Laino A, D’Alessio R, Grandi G, Tartaglia GM, Ferrario VF (2008) Soft-tissue facial characteristics of attractive and normal adolescent boys and girls. Angle Orthod 78:799–807PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Uzun A, Akbas H, Bilgic S, Emirzeoglu M, Bostanci O, Sahin B, Bek Y (2006) The average values of the nasal anthropometric measurements in 108 young Turkish males. Auris Nasus Larynx 33:31–35PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Bearn DR, Sandy JR, Shaw WC (2002) Photogrammetric assessment of the soft tissue profile in unilateral cleft lip and palate. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 39:597–603PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Aung SC, Foo CL, Lee ST (2000) Three dimensional laser scan assessment of the Oriental nose with a new classification of Oriental nasal types. Br J Plast Surg 53:109–116PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Douglas TS (2004) Image processing for craniofacial landmark identification and measurement: a review of photogrammetry and cephalometry. Comput Med Imaging Graph 28:401–409PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Guyot L, Dubuc M, Richard O, Philip N, Dutour O (2003) Comparison between direct clinical and digital photogrammetric measurements in patients with 22q11 microdeletion. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 32:246–252PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Zhang X, Hans MG, Graham G, Kirchner HL, Redline S (2007) Correlations between cephalometric and facial photographic measurements of craniofacial form. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 131:67–71PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ercan I, Ocakoglu G, Guney I, Yazici B (2008) Adaptation of generalizability theory for inter-rater reliability for landmark localization. Int J Tomogr Stat 9:51–58Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Dimitrov DM (2006) Reliability. In: Erford BT (ed) Assessment for counselors. Houghton-Mifflin/Lahaska, Boston, chap. 3Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC and International Society of Aesthetic Plastic Surgery 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Senem Turan Ozdemir
    • 1
  • Deniz Sigirli
    • 2
  • Ilker Ercan
    • 2
  • N. Simsek  Cankur
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Anatomy, Faculty of MedicineUludag UniversityBursaTurkey
  2. 2.Department of Biostatistics, Faculty of MedicineUludag UniversityBursaTurkey

Personalised recommendations