Natural variation of the zygomaticomaxillary complex symmetry in normal individuals

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcms.2017.09.017Get rights and content

Abstract

Objective

The study aim was to investigate variations in the symmetry of the zygomaticomaxillary complex (ZMC) in normal individuals.

Method

Computed tomography datasets of 200 individuals without facial fractures were analyzed using a validated three-dimensional analysis technique. The absolute average distance (AD) and 90th percentile distance (NPD) were calculated, representing respectively the overall and maximum symmetry between bilateral ZMCs.

Results

The mean AD and NPD of the total study group was 0.9 ± 0.3 mm (95% CI 0.3–2.3) and 1.7 ± 0.5 mm (95% CI 0.5–3.9), respectively. The mean AD and NPD in males were 1.0 ± 0.3 mm (95% CI 0.28–2.34) and 1.9 ± 0.5 mm (95% CI 0.5–3.9) versus 0.8 ± 0.3 mm (95% CI 0.4–1.7) and 1.6 ± 0.5 mm (95% CI 0.8–2.9), respectively, for females. A statistically significant difference between male and female was found for both AD and NPD (p < 0.01). The male population <40 years had a mean AD and NPD of 1.0 ± 0.3 mm and 1.8 ± 0.5 mm, which was not statistically significant when compared with males >40 years.

Conclusion

The naturally occurring anatomic variation in ZMC symmetry described in this study is proposed as a benchmark for evaluating the amount of preoperative displacement and postoperative reduction of ZMC in trauma cases.

Introduction

The most frequently encountered midfacial fractures are zygomaticomaxillary complex (ZMC) fractures (Gupta et al., 2009, van Hout et al., 2013, Arangio et al., 2014). In ZMC fracture cases, the restoration of facial symmetry is the main treatment goal after functional recovery (Ellis, 2013, Ellis and Perez, 2014) because symmetry plays an important role in the visual perception of faces (Grammer and Thornhill, 1994, Perrett et al., 1998, Rhodes, 2006). Furthermore, a symmetrical face is correlated with perceived healthiness and attractiveness (Rhodes et al., 1998, Jones et al., 2001, Fink et al., 2006).

Computer-assisted surgery (CAS) plays a significant role in several fields of oral and maxillofacial surgery (Cevidanes et al., 2007, Cevidanes et al., 2009, Nada et al., 2011, Moubayed et al., 2012, Swennen, 2014, Schepers et al., 2015, Dubois et al., 2015). CAS has gained clinical importance for facilitating the accuracy of achieving symmetrical surgical reconstruction of the orbit and midface (Metzger et al., 2007, Schramm et al., 2009, Gander et al., 2015, Dubois et al., 2015, Wagner et al., 2015), especially in unilateral, hard-tissue, maxillofacial trauma management. The main steps in CAS protocols concerned with unilateral defects consist of the creation of a three-dimensional (3D), virtual, hard-tissue model, followed by segmentation, mirroring, and finally superimposing of the non-traumatized segmented region of interest onto the defect. The basis for this technique is the assumption that faces are symmetrical. However, the craniofacial bone is generally regarded as being slightly asymmetrical (Rossi et al., 2003). Several papers have been published in which a method is proposed for measuring the amount of asymmetry of the ZMC, emphasizing the interest, relevance, and importance of the ZMC (Nechala et al., 1998, Furst et al., 2001, Czerwinski et al., 2005, Pham et al., 2007, Metzger et al., 2007, Moubayed et al., 2012).

The main aim of this study was to test the hypothesis that the ZMC can be considered to be fairly symmetrical, which would justify the use of a CAS protocol in unilateral ZMC defects. For this purpose, the range of gender-specific, hard-tissue ZMC symmetry was measured through the use of a validated 3D semi-automatic method. Secondly, the ZMCs of males 40 years and younger were evaluated, because this is the demographic most frequently encountered with ZMC fractures (Ellis and Kittidumkerng, 1996, van den Bergh et al., 2012, Ellis and Perez, 2014). Finally, based on the normal variation in ZMC symmetry, a benchmark was proposed that can contribute to the diagnostic and clinical decision-making process, in addition to the postoperative evaluation of ZMC fracture cases.

Section snippets

Materials and methods

This study was approved by the Medical Ethical Committee of the Academic Medical Centre (AMC) of the University of Amsterdam (Ref. No. W16_216) and was done in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki guidelines for human research. The study was conducted at the Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery in conjunction with the Department of Radiology of the AMC.

Results

The mean age of the patients from whom the CT scans were obtained was 58 ± 19 years (range 18–94) (Table 2). The mean AD calculated for the total study population was 0.9 ± 0.3 mm (95% CI: 0.3–2.3); the corresponding mean NPD was 1.7 ± 0.5 mm (95% CI: 0.5–3.9) (Table 3, Table 4). A mean AD of 1.0 ± 0.3 mm (95% CI: 0.3–2.3) and a mean NPD of 1.9 ± 0.5 mm (95% CI: 0.5–3.9) were found for the male study population (Table 3, Table 4). For the female study population, the mean AD and NPD were

Discussion

In clinical practice the human skull is considered to be in symmetrical harmony (Schmelzeisen et al., 2004, Nowinski et al., 2011, Wagner et al., 2015). However, a limited amount of asymmetry of the craniomaxillofacial bones is not unusual (Rossi et al., 2003). Over the years many methods for symmetry measurement of the ZMC have been described, such as direct measurements on dry skulls, cephalometric radiographic image analysis, and anthropometrics (Farkas and Cheung, 1981, Furst et al., 2001,

Conclusion

Through the use of a recently validated, 3D, semi-automatic method this study illustrates the anatomical variance in symmetry of the ZMC. The authors submit that the amount of ZMC asymmetry found is insignificant, which in our opinion justifies the use of mirroring techniques. A baseline criterion is proposed for normal anatomical (overall and maximal) symmetry of the ZMC, which can function as a benchmark for evaluating asymmetry in ZMC trauma cases for diagnostic and evaluation purposes.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval (Ref. No. W16_216)

The local ethics committee considered this study not subject to consent, and the study was performed in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki.

Ethical standards

In compliance with ethical standards.

Informed consent

Not required. CT data were collected from an earlier study.

Funding

No funding was received for this study.

Acknowledgements

The authors thank Serge A. Steenen for his kind assistance in preparing the illustrations used in Figures 1–6.

References (45)

  • J.P.T.F. Ho et al.

    Measuring zygomaticomaxillary complex symmetry three-dimensionally with the use of mirroring and surface based matching techniques

    J Craniomaxillofac Surg

    (2016)
  • B.C. Jones et al.

    Facial symmetry and judgements of apparent health: support for a ‘good genes’ explanation of the attractiveness–symmetry relationship

    Evol Hum Behav

    (2001)
  • A. Pham et al.

    Computer modelling and intraoperative navigation in maxillofacial surgery

    Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg

    (2007)
  • R.H. Schepers et al.

    Accuracy of fibula reconstruction using patient-specific CAD/CAM reconstruction plates and dental implants: a new modality for functional reconstruction of mandibular defects

    J Craniomaxillofac Surg

    (2015)
  • R. Schmelzeisen et al.

    Navigation-aided reconstruction of medial orbital wall and floor contour in cranio-maxillofacial reconstruction

    Injury

    (2004)
  • G.R. Swennen

    Timing of three-dimensional virtual treatment planning of orthognathic surgery: a prospective single-surgeon evaluation on 350 consecutive cases

    Oral Maxillofac Surg Clin North Am

    (2014)
  • M.E. Wagner et al.

    Development and first clinical application of automated virtual reconstruction of unilateral midface defects

    J Craniomaxillofac Surg

    (2015)
  • A. Belcastro et al.

    A three-dimensional analysis of zygomatic symmetry in normal, uninjured faces

    J Craniofac Surg

    (2016)
  • P.J. Besl et al.

    A method for registration of 3-D shapes

    IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell

    (1992)
  • M. Breuninger et al.

    Diagnostic accuracy of computer-aided detection of pulmonary tuberculosis in chest radiographs: a validation study from sub-Saharan Africa

    PLoS One

    (2014)
  • M. Czerwinski et al.

    Quantitative topographical evaluation of the orbitozygomatic complex

    Plast Reconstr Surg

    (2005)
  • J. Damstra et al.

    A three-dimensional comparison of amorphometric and conventional cephalometric midsagittal planes for craniofacial asymmetry

    Clin Oral Investig

    (2012)
  • Cited by (13)

    • Zygomaticomaxillary complex fracture repair with intraoperative CBCT imaging. A prospective cohort study

      2022, Journal of Cranio-Maxillofacial Surgery
      Citation Excerpt :

      An advantage of this method is that there is no need to define a symmetry plane. The method has similarities with the methods used by Ho et al., 2016, 2017 and Gibelli et al. (2018), but differs with regard to the reference area for the surface based matching. In present study, the ACF is the reference area.

    • Evaluation of the Midface by Statistical Shape Modeling

      2021, Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery
      Citation Excerpt :

      As Semper-Hogg et al15 pointed out, mirroring as mentioned previously might be feasible, but the use of the SSM instead could be even more precise. In the studies of Ho et al2,3 and Gong et al,1 gender differences, however, were only addressed regarding the maximum extent of gender-specific asymmetry and not in a graphical display, respectively, in providing color-coded difference maps. In our study, the main region of asymmetry was found in the nasal septum and anterior nasal spine.

    • Three-dimensional quantification of skeletal midfacial complex symmetry

      2023, International Journal of Computer Assisted Radiology and Surgery
    View all citing articles on Scopus

    This work should be attributed to the Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Academic Medical Centre/Academic Centre for Dentistry Amsterdam (ACTA) and University of Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ Amsterdam, The Netherlands. Head of Department: J. de Lange, MD, DDS, PhD, Professor of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery.

    1

    Equal contribution.

    View full text