Aesthetic Plastic Surgery

, Volume 42, Issue 2, pp 479–490 | Cite as

Comparison of Periorbital Anthropometry Between Beauty Pageant Contestants and Ordinary Young Women with Korean Ethnicity: A Three-Dimensional Photogrammetric Analysis

  • Young Chul Kim
  • Jin Geun Kwon
  • Sung Chan Kim
  • Chang Hun Huh
  • Hee Jin Kim
  • Tae Suk Oh
  • Kyung S. Koh
  • Jong Woo ChoiEmail author
  • Woo Shik Jeong
Original Article Facial Surgery



The purpose of this study is to investigate the differences in the periorbital anthropometry between national Beauty Pageant Contestants and Ordinary Young Women with Korean ethnicity.


Forty-three Beauty Pageant Contestants who were elected for the national beauty contest and forty-eight Ordinary Young Women underwent 3D photography. The authors analyzed 3D photogrammetric measures regarding periorbital soft tissue.


The palpebral fissure width was significantly higher in the Beauty Pageant Contestants than the Ordinary Young Women (27.7 ± 1.2 vs. 26.3 ± 1.6 mm) (p < 0.001). The palpebral fissure height was also significantly higher in the Beauty Pageant Contestants (11.5. ± 1.0 vs. 9.1 ± 1.2 mm) (p < 0.001). The intercanthal width and upper eyelid height were smaller for the Beauty Pageant Contestants (intercanthal width, 34.3 ± 1.86 mm vs. 36.7 ± 3.1 mm; upper eyelid height, 11.5 ± 1.4 mm vs. 13.4 ± 2.3 mm) (p < 0.05). The nasal width and midfacial width were significantly smaller in the Beauty Pageant Contestants (nasal width, 38.0 ± 1.8 vs. 39.5 ± 2.2 mm; midfacial width 144.5 ± 3.9 vs. 146.9 ± 5.2 mm) (p < 0.05). The eyebrow showed significantly different features between the two groups in terms of vertical position in the upper face and the shape of the brow apex. The interpupillary distance, binocular distance, slant of palpebral fissure and width of pretarsal crease showed no significant difference between the two groups.


Periorbital features in Beauty Pageant Contestants are wide-set eyes, larger palpebral fissure in width and height, relatively small upper eyelid height and intercanthal width, and relatively small nose and facial width compared to normal women. Our anthropometric results can be referable values for Asian eyelid surgery and help surgeons to establish individualized surgical planning.

Level of Evidence V

This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors


3D analysis 3D photogrammetry Attractiveness Asian eyes 


Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest to disclose.

Ethical approval

The need for informed consent from subjects was waived by the Institutional Review Board of our hospital because of the retrospective nature of the study. Regarding the photograph, the photographic authorization and release consent was granted from the subject. The study conformed to the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki.


  1. 1.
    Liew S, Wu WT, Chan HH, Ho WW, Kim HJ, Goodman GJ, Peng PH, Rogers JD (2016) Consensus on changing trends, attitudes, and concepts of Asian beauty. Aesthet Plast Surg 40:193–201CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    McCurdy JA (1994) Upper lid blepharoplasty in the oriental eye. Facial Plast Surg 10:53–66CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Millard DR Jr (1955) Oriental peregrinations. Plast Reconstr Surg (1946) 16:319–336CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    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 6:244–252CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bashour M (2006) History and current concepts in the analysis of facial attractiveness. Plast Reconstr Surg 118:741–756CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bashour M (2006) An objective system for measuring facial attractiveness. Plast Reconstr Surg 118:757–774 (discussion 775–756) CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Rhee SC, Dhong ES, Yoon ES (2009) Photogrammetric facial analysis of attractive Korean entertainers. Aesthet Plast Surg 33:167–174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Li Q, Zhang X, Li K, Quan Y, Cai X, Xu S, Zhu F, Lu R (2016) Normative anthropometric analysis and aesthetic indication of the ocular region for young Chinese adults. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 254:189–197CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Farkas LG (1994) Anthropometry of the head and face. Raven Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Johnson CC (1978) Epicanthus and epiblepharon. Arch Ophthalmol 96:1030–1033CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Farkas LG, Katic MJ, Forrest CR et al (2005) International anthropometric study of facial morphology in various ethnic groups/races. J Craniofac Surg 16:615–646CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kunjur J, Sabesan T, Ilankovan V (2006) Anthropometric analysis of eyebrows and eyelids: an inter-racial study. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 44:89–93CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lee JS, Kim WK, Kim SS (2004) Anthropometric analysis of the attractive and normal faces in korean female. J Korean Soc Plast Reconstr Surg 31:526–531Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Rhee SC, Lee SH (2010) Attractive composite faces of different races. Aesthet Plast Surg 34:800–801CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hanada AL, de Souza EN Jr., Moribe I, Cruz AA (2001) Comparison of palpebral fissure obliquity in three different racial groups. Ophthal Plast Reconstr Surg 17:423–426CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Park DH, Choi WS, Yoon SH, Song CH (2008) Anthropometry of asian eyelids by age. Plast Reconstr Surg 121:1405–1413CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Rhee SC, Woo KS, Kwon B (2012) Biometric study of eyelid shape and dimensions of different races with references to beauty. Aesthet Plast Surg 36:1236–1245CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Jayaratne YS, Deutsch CK, Zwahlen RA (2013) Normative findings for periocular anthropometric measurements among Chinese young adults in Hong Kong. Biomed Res Int 2013:821428CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Wu XS, Jian XC, He ZJ, Gao X, Li Y, Zhong X (2010) Investigation of anthropometric measurements of anatomic structures of orbital soft tissue in 102 young han chinese adults. Ophthal Plast Reconstr Surg 26:339–343CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Cho DH, Ham KS, Cho YJ (1989) An anthropometric analysis on the beautiful and ugly faces of the young Koreans. J Korean Soc Plast Reconstr Surg 16:926Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Baek SW, Kom H, Park SH, Band YH (1995) Anthropometric analysis of palpebral fissure. J Korean Soc Plast Reconstr Surg 1:221Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Bae TH, Kim JC, Kim WS, Kim HK, Kim SH (2007) A Photogrammetic study of the eyes in Korean youths. J Korean Soc Plast Reconstr Surg 34:37–43Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Cho JH, Han KH, Kang JS (1993) Normal anthropometric values and standardized templates of Korean face and head. Korean Soc Aesthet Plast Surg 20:995–1005Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Zan T, Jin R, Li H, Herrler T, Meng X, Huang X, Li Q, Gu B (2016) A novel u-flap epicanthoplasty for Asian patients. Aesthet Plast Surg 40:458–465CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Ortiz-Monasterio F, Rodriguez A (1985) Lateral canthoplasty to change the eye slant. Plast Reconstr Surg 75:1–10CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Grundl M, Klein S, Horczakiwskyj R, Feser D, Jung M, Eisenmann-Klein M, Prantl L (2008) The “jaguar’s eye” as a new beauty trend? Age-related effects in judging the attractiveness of the oblique eye axis. Aesthet Plast Surg 32:915–919CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Tessier P (1987) Foreword. In: Farkas LG, Munro IR (eds) Anthropometric Facial Proportions in Medicine. Springfield, IL, p. ixGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Song RY (1988) Further comment on double eyelid operation. Zhonghua Zheng Xing Shao Shang Wai Ke Za Zhi 4:6–9PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Westmore M (1974) Facial cosmetics in conjuction with surgery. Paper presented at: Aesthetic Plastic Surgical Society meeting. Vancouver, BC, CanadaGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    McKinney P, Mossie RD, Zukowski ML (1991) Criteria for the forehead lift. Aesthet Plast Surg 15:141–147CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature and International Society of Aesthetic Plastic Surgery 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Asan Medical CenterUlsan University College of MedicineSeoulKorea
  2. 2.Department of Dermatology, Bun Dang Seoul National Medical Center, College of MedicineSeoul National UniversitySeoulKorea
  3. 3.Department of Dental Anatomy, College of DentistryYonsei UniversitySeoulKorea

Personalised recommendations