Buccal Corridor Width Research Articles

Changes in the arch width and buccal corridor after fixed orthodontic treatment with Damon self-ligating system: premolar extraction vs. non-extraction.

Extraction vs. non-extraction is a crucial decision in orthodontic therapy. The aim of the present study was to investigate the changes in the dental arch width and buccal corridor after orthodontic treatment using extraction and non-extraction therapy with Damon self-ligating system. This retrospective study consisted of 35 patients (20 female and 15 male patients with median age of 12.5 years), treated by extracting 4 or 2 premolars, and 37 patients (16 female and 21 male patients with the median age of 12.8 years), treated without premolar extraction. Both groups were treated with Damon self-ligating system. Plaster models before (T0) and after (T1) treatment were measured, and the arch width values were determined at the level of the first molars, second premolars, canines and palatal rugae. Buccal corridor width was measured using the extraoral images at T0 and T1. Paired t-test was used for the analysis of the normally distributed data, and Wilcoxon Mann-Whitney U test was used for the data with non-normal distribution. Values of p<0.05 were set as statistically significant. The upper intercanine width increased significantly in both groups (p<0.01). In the non-extraction group, the arch width increased significantly in the maxillary second premolar and first molar region (p<0.01) as well as in the region of the canines (p=0.04), second premolars (p=0.01) and first molars (p<0.01) of the mandible. The buccal corridor decreased significantly in the non-extraction group (p<0.01). Premolar extraction in combination with Damon self-ligating system did not lead to reduction of the dental arch width in the maxilla, nor did it increase the size of the buccal corridors.

A Comparative Analysis of the Effect of Individualistic, Unique Hard- and Soft-tissue Parameters of the Face on Buccal Corridors in Adolescents and Adults with Angle’s Class I and Angle’s Class II Division 1 Malocclusion

Background and Objectives: This study was designed to determine the relationship between the parameters: buccal corridor, buccal corridor linear ratio (BCLR), upper intercanine width, intermolar width, and premolar basal arch width on a posed smile in adolescents and adults. The buccal corridor affects smile esthetics; hence, it is important to see its correlation with intercanine width. In addition, the study aimed to determine if the buccal corridor changes adversely in Class I and Class II Division 1 malocclusion patients and during growth. Materials and Methods: Posed smile and standard full-front face photographs of 150 patients were taken. Group A consisted of 50 adolescent patients between the ages of 11 and 14 years, divided equally based on malocclusion type. Group B consisted of 100 young adults between the ages of 18 and 25 years, divided equally into Class I and Class II Division 1 malocclusion. The parameters calibrated in the photographs were: upper intercanine distance, intercanthal distance, intercommisure width, difference between intercanthal and intercommisure width, distance between the last visible teeth in the maxilla, and BCLR. Results: The results of this study were analyzed using one-way ANOVA and Chi-square tests. The analysis showed a significant correlation between BCLR, intercanine width, distance from the last visible teeth, intercanthal distance, and intercommisure width, and their difference varied significantly among males and females, with P &lt; 0.05. Conclusion: This study concluded that the buccal corridor and intercanine width vary with age and gender. The buccal corridor is usually wider in young adults than in adolescent children.

Perception of smile attractiveness among laypeople and orthodontists regarding the buccal corridor space, as it is defined by the eyes. An innovated technique.

To investigate whether there is a relationship between the distance between the iris and pupil with the ideal size of buccal corridors. A full-portrait image of a male Caucasian was used to create a set of 11 digitally modified images with different buccal corridor space. A web-based cross-sectional study was designed and distributed via an online survey to 200 laypeople and 200 orthodontists to assess image attractiveness, using a Visual analogue scale. For the statistical analysis, Wilcoxon signed-rank and Mann-Whitney U tests were used. The significance level was set at p < 0.05. The response rate for laypeople was 70% (n=139), while the rate for orthodontists was 73% (n=146). For the layperson group, the maximum smile attractiveness score was 10% of buccal width reduction, compared to the iris-pupillary distance, while for the orthodontists, it was 20%. The attractiveness of the smile was significantly reduced in both groups when the buccal corridor width was increased in comparison to the iris-pupillary distance. The length between the mesial part of the iris and the distal of the pupil, may constitutes a landmark for the estimation of the desired width of the buccal corridor. Inter iris-pupillary distance can be the starting point in the smile designing process, in order to perform a facial driven selection of buccal corridor size.

Comparison of Buccal Corridor Width in Post Treatment Patients Treated with Non Extraction Vs Extraction Therapy in Mithilanchal Population

Introduction: A wide variety of opinion exists on the effect of extraction on the buccal corridor width which has a direct impact on smile esthetics. Till date no study regarding this has been done in Mithilanchal population. Aims and objectives: To compare the post-treatment buccal corridor width and posterior corridor width of patients treated with or without four first premolars extraction in Mithilanchal population. Materials and Methods: This was a cross-sectional study conducted at department of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics in Mithila Minority Dental College and Hospital, Darbhanga, Bihar. Post treatment posed smile photographs of 24 extraction patients and 24 non-extraction patients were compared using standardization and cropping in adobe Photoshop version 7.0. Statistical analysis was done with SPSS software (IBM Corp 2013; Version 22.0; Armonk, NY) and independent t-test to compare buccal corridor width and posterior corridor width between two groups. Results: The age group of subjects varied from 1 3 to 26 years. The mean age of group 1 (extraction) and group 2 (non-extraction) patients were 1 7.75 ± 4.48 years and 20.21 ± 4.03 years respectively. The mean width of buccal corridor in extraction patients were 35.33 ± 1 .52 % and for non-extraction group was found to be 35.38 ± 1 .54 %. (non-significant,p = 0.903). The posterior corridor mean width was 20.46 % in group 1 patients and 19.83% in group 2 patients (non-significant, p = 0.274). Conclusion: No significant difference in the buccal corridor and posterior corridor widths was found after orthodontic treatment with and without extraction of the first four premolars.

Evaluation of Buccal Corridors in Patients Seeking Orthodontic Treatment in Different Types of Malocclusion at Tertiary Care Hospital

There are many factors that make an appealing smile, and the buccal corridor is one of the most crucial smiling characteristics. Objective: To evaluate the width of buccal corridors in patients with different types of malocclusions seeking orthodontic treatment at tertiary care hospital LUMHS Jamshoro/Hyderabad. Methods: 93 subjects were studied. Patients were asked to smile fully to measure buccal corridor width with a vernier caliper. The buccal corridor was estimated by multiplying the maxillary interproximal width by the inner lip corner distance by 100. They were divided into 5 modes by buccal corridor percentage. i-e: Buccal corridor 2% (wide smile), Buccal corridor 10% (nearly a wide smile), Buccal corridor 15% (mediocre smile), Buccal corridor 22% (nearly a narrow smile), Buccal corridor above 22% (narrow smile). Angle's malocclusion classification classified all patients. Results: The mean age was 19.18. Males were 34.4% and females were 65.6%. With various types of buccal corridors among them, 37 participants were in a class I malocclusion, 43 were in the class II and 13 were in the class III malocclusion. 14 participants belongs to medium narrow buccal corridors (15.1%), 18 belongs to the medium buccal corridors (19.4%), 47 belongs to the medium broad buccal corridors (50.5%), and 14 belongs to broad buccal corridors (15.1%). The results showed that there was no significant association between these two variables having p-value 0.207. Conclusion: Medium broad buccal corridors were seen more frequently in various types of malocclusion

Surgically assisted rapid palatal expansion: is the pterygomaxillary disjunction necessary? A finite element study

Transverse discrepancy is an important factor in determining facial esthetics. It has been shown there is an inverse correlation between the buccal corridor width and the intercanine and intermolar widths. Despite the fact midpalatal expansion is the treatment of choice for growing subjects, for skeletally mature subjects the rapid palatal expansion has limited orthopedic effects, and surgically assisted rapid palatal expansion (SARPE) is preferred. SARPE has shown inconsistencies depending on the surgical technique and/or expander device design. Some authors suggest that median and lateral osteotomies are sufficient to achieve the desired transverse dimensions using the SARPE procedure, while others recommend additional surgical separation of the pterygomaxillary junction. There are still controversies regarding the pterygomaxillary sutures (PMS) disjunction effect. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the displacement and stress distribution of the craniofacial structures resulting from SARPE, either with or without PMS osteotomy, using two different expander design (tooth-borne and tooth-bone-borne) using finite element method and finite element analysis (FEM/FEA). Regardless of the maxillary expander device type, both SARPE surgical techniques effectively produced maxillary expansion. SARPE with PMS osteotomy presented parallel maxillary expansion, and reduced stress values in the craniofacial and maxillofacial structures.

Perception about Importance of Buccal Corridor and its Width in Smile Esthetics

Aim: To assess the perception of dental students and house officers regarding role of buccal corridor in smile esthetics and to determine the most esthetically pleasing buccal corridor width. Methods: A photograph of the patient’s face, smiling with the teeth visible up to the first molar was modified digitally to create smiles with no buccal corridor, increasing buccal corridors widths of 5%, 10%, 15%, 20 % and 25% respectively compared with the width of inner oral commissure. A total of 376 dental students and HOs participated in the study and data was collected in questionnaires. Results: Buccal corridor is considered to affect the smile esthetics of an individual by 72.4% of house officers, 67.6% of second year students, 48.7% of 3rd year students and 52.4% of fourth year students(P value: 0.002). Visibility of around 5-10% of buccal corridor was considered most esthetically pleasing, however, the result was not significant. Conclusion: Buccal corridor is an important component in smile esthetics considered by students and house officers of dental colleges. Buccal corridor width of 5-10 % was considered most esthetically pleasing among participants. Keywords: Buccal corridor, Esthetics, perception

Effect of Buccal Corridors Width on Smile Quality and Esthetics

OBJECTIVE: To assess the perception of buccal corridor width on smile esthetics by Orthodontic residents, General dentists and Laypersons. METHODOLOGY: A smile photograph was taken of an adult female. The image was modified to obtain five different buccal corridor widths and were assessed by different evaluators grouped into general dentist, orthodontic resident and laypersons who rated the attractiveness of each smile by means of a visual analog scale (VAS). Sample size was 97 participants to rate the picture. Non-probability purposive sampling was done The data was analyzed and mean and SD were calculated for the scores of rating. ANOVA and Tukey's post hoc test was applied to compare the different ratings of buccal corridors in three groups. The data of this cross sectional study was collected from general population belonging to different communities, general dentists and orthodontic residents of different dental colleges of Karachi, Pakistan from August 2019 to March 2020. RESULTS: There were 97 participants who responded to the images. Highest scores were obtained for Image 1 having buccal corridor width ratio of 16% followed by image no. 3 having buccal corridor width ratio of 10% and lowest scores were obtained for Image no. 6 having least buccal corridor widths ratio that is 34% followed by image no 5 having 26% buccal corridor widths. Among the groups of participants, the highest scores were given by laypersons for all images. Significant differences were observed between evaluation of groups of Orthodontic resident and layperson in most images. CONCLUSION: There was a remarkable influence of buccal corridor width on smile esthetics, with the 16% ratio group being rated as the most attractive by all three groups. KEYWORDS: Buccal corridors, Smile, esthetics, Attractiveness

Comparative analysis of smile esthetics between top celebrity smile and a Southern European population

Statement of problemThe analysis of different parameters involved in the esthetic perception of the smile is important for the correct planning of cosmetic dental treatments. PurposeThe purpose of this study was to analyze the differences in the main parameters of smile esthetics among celebrities identified as having the best esthetic smiles and a young Southern European population. Material and methodsThe study consisted of a control group of 144 dental students from the University of Seville (69.4% women; 30.6% men) with a mean ±standard deviation age of 23.19 ±0.5 years and photographs of 58 celebrities identified as having the best esthetic smiles (74.1% women; 25.9% men) with a mean ±standard deviation age of 42.09 ±2.25 years. Photographs of the celebrities were obtained from the Internet, and standardized photographs were made of the control group. The variables measured were smile line, smile arc, incisal edges and lower lip relationship, smile width, dental midline deviation and tilting, buccal corridor widths, and angulation discrepancy between interpupillary line and commissural line and between interpupillary line and occlusal plane. The data obtained were processed in a statistical software program for a descriptive statistical analysis and for inferential analysis parametric statistical tests by applying the Wilcoxon, chi-square, Student t, and kappa index tests (α=.05). ResultsStatistically significant differences (P<.01) were found between the groups in terms of smile width, smile arc, midline deviation and tilting, and angulation discrepancy between the interpupillary line and the commissural line. Smile arc was the only variable found to be different (P<.01) in relation to sex. ConclusionsCharacteristics of the most esthetic smiles were no deviation or tilting of the maxillary midline, showing a greater number of teeth in the smile, displaying incisal edges parallel to the lower lip (particularly in women), and displaying occlusal and commissural planes parallel to the interpupillary line.

DIFFERENCES AMONG THE PERCEPTIONS OF ORTHODONTISTS, PROSTHODONTISTS AND CONSERVATIVE DENTISTRY SPECIALISTS REGARDING BUCCAL CORRIDOR WIDTHS

ABSTRACT&#x0D; BACKGROUND &amp; OBJECTIVE: To find out the optimal ranges of smile attractiveness on basis of different amounts of buccal corridor widths, as judged by Pakistani orthodontists, prosthodontists and conservative dentistry specialists (CDS).&#x0D; METHODOLOGY: Present cross-sectional study was conducted from June 2016 to June 2017. The anterior smiling image of a female model was edited to be converted to 10 images displaying different amounts of buccal corridor width. After informed consent from the subject, different buccal corridors widths images were created at following widths: 0%, 2%, 4%, 6%, 8%, 10%, 12%, 14%, 16%, and 18%. This was followed by measurement of smile attractiveness of these 10 images on a visual analogue scale by 30 evaluators in three groups. Group 1 consisted of 10 CDS, group 2 consisted of 10 prosthodontists and group 3 consisted of 10 orthodontists. The data was collected and scores of smile attractiveness were presented in form of mean and standard deviation for each group. The differences in the three groups regarding perception of smile attractiveness were found out using ANOVA test and Turkey’s post-hoc test was used for multiple comparisons.&#x0D; RESULTS: For group 1, the highest scoring was obtained by image showing 10% buccal corridor width. In group 2, the highest score was by image showing 14% buccal corridor width, whereas in group 3, the highest scoring was showing 12% buccal corridor width. The differences found were statistically insignificant.&#x0D; CONCLUSION: Dental specialty does not affect perception of smile attractiveness. Buccal corridor width greater than 14% should be avoided.

Photographic Evaluation, Analysis and Comparison of Aesthetically Pleasing Smiles: A Prospective Study.

To evaluate the differences in aesthetically pleasing smiles and compare the smile arc parameters in males and females by dental specialists using photographs. The study was conducted on 500 North Indian subjects (Indo-Aryan race; 212 males and 288 females) aged 17-25 years (mean age, males=21.1 years; females=23.4 years), with reasonably pleasing smiles. The facial photographs were taken using a DSLR camera. The standardized photographs were shown to 30 judges for evaluation and rated using the visual analog scale. The smiles were categorized into attractive, fair, and average. The quantification of the smile characteristics was done by using an objective method that involved identifying consonant and non-consonant smiles. The association between smile arc and smile attractiveness was significant (p=0.018) in females. The buccal corridor width was higher among those with fair to attractive smiles as compared with those with an average smile (p=0.018). Most subjects with an attractive smile had a smile arc parallel to the upper lip as compared with most subjects with a fair or average smile who did not have the smile arc in parallel (p=0.006). Most females were in the fair to attractive category whereas most males were in the average to fair category. The buccal corridor width was found to be higher among those with a fair to attractive smile as compared with those with an average smile. There was an association between smile arc and smile attractiveness in females.

Effect of class II extractions and functional appliance treatment on smile esthetics.

Class II malocclusion is routinely observed in orthodontics. Its treatment usually revolves around the growth modification or the extractions of the teeth. Identifying treatment that leads to the greatest improvement can aid clinicians in providing the desired smile esthetics. The aim of the study was to compare smile esthetics between treatment groups by measuring various smile variables and the esthetic perceptions of 3 panels of raters. A cross-sectional study was performed on 66 patients equally divided into the functional appliance (FA) and upper first premolar extraction (UPE) groups. Eight smile variables were measured on post-treatment photographs using the Adobe Photoshop® software. Ten orthodontic residents, general dentists and laypersons performed the subjective evaluations of smiles using the visual analog scale (VAS). The Mann-Whitney U-test was applied to compare smile variables between the groups. The Kruskal-Wallis test was used to compare esthetic scores (ES) among the raters. The simple linear regression analysis, followed by the multiple linear regression analysis was applied to determine the smile variables associated with the ES values. Statistically significant differences were found between the FA and UPE groups for the buccal corridor ratio (BCR) (p = 0.046), the visible dentition width ratio (VDWR) (p = 0.019) and the arch form index (AFI) (p < 0.001). The Kruskal-Wallis test showed significant differences in ES among the raters for the FA (p < 0.001) and UPE (p = 0.004) groups. The simple linear regression analysis showed significant associations between ES and the patient's age (p = 0.002), BCR (p = 0.020) and VDWR (p = 0.006). The multiple linear regression analysis showed that age (p = 0.008) and VDWR (p = 0.021) were significantly associated with the ES values. The FA group had narrower buccal corridor spaces, a greater visible dentition width and a wider arch form in their smiles. The UPE group showed an increase in the buccal corridor width. Each panel rated the FA appliance group as superior.

Are buccal corridors and smile width relating to smile esthetics? - A Photometric Study

The present photometric study investigated the correlation of buccal corridor and smile width to an esthetic smile and the influence of the facial form on it. Standardized photographs of posed smile of 60 subjects in the age range of 17-25 years were taken. Among those 60 subjects, 3 groups were divided as 20 subjects each in leptoprosopic facial form, mesoprosopic facial form and euryprosopic facial form (according to morphological facial index given by Martin and Saller in 1957). Frontal smile photographs were taken and measurements of maximum smile width, right and left buccal corridor spaces were done according to methodology proposed by Johnson and Smith (1995) using software Corel DRAW X7. As separate evaluation done by orthodontists and lay persons and both of them presented with no differences of buccal corridor width and the total smile width in the esthetic smiles from comparing the percentage between the study groups. Remarkable finding was that the buccal corridor width and total smile width does not alter with the 3 types of facial form and broad faces have a tendency for broader buccal corridor and narrow faces have smaller buccal corridor.

Comparison of smile esthetics among celebrities, dentists, and dental students in a Han Chinese population

Statement of problemVarious components of smile esthetics have been evaluated. However, whether these components affect smile esthetics in Han Chinese celebrities, dentists, and dental students is unknown. PurposeThe purpose of this study was to evaluate the smile esthetics of celebrities, dentists, and dental students in a Han Chinese population. Material and methodsFrontal images of smiles were obtained from the Internet for the celebrity group, while images of dentists and dental students were collected for the dentist and dental student groups. The buccal and posterior corridor ratios, the alignment discrepancy between the commissural and interpupillary lines, the number of teeth revealed, the width ratio relative to the golden proportion, and the width-to-length ratios of maxillary anterior teeth were calculated by using a photo-editing software program. Statistical analysis was performed by using 2-way ANOVA and the Tukey HSD test (α=.05). ResultsEligible images were obtained for 81 celebrities, 83 dentists, and 78 dental students. The celebrities were found to have the highest buccal and posterior corridor ratios and reveal the least teeth in the smile among the 3 groups (all P<.001). The alignment discrepancy for celebrities was significantly less than that for dental students (P=.025). Moreover, the absolute difference of width ratios from the golden proportion was significantly different from 0 for all groups (all P<.001). ConclusionsSignificant differences were found in the smiles of Han Chinese celebrities, dentists, and dental students in regard to the buccal and posterior corridor ratios, the alignment discrepancy between the commissural and interpupillary lines, and the number of teeth revealed. Chinese celebrities tended to have a smile that displays to the second premolar, with a medium buccal corridor width.

Evaluation of different smile parameters in the Turkish population

Aim: In the past, patients and dentists thought that the dental aesthetics could only be ensured with modifications on teeth. Together with the latest developments in the smile analysis and aesthetic design, researchers have identified the aesthetics based on facial, oral-facial, dentogingival, and dental components. The aim of this study is to evaluate the smile type (ST), smile line (SL), maxillary incisal line types (ML), and buccal corridor widths (BC) related to the smile aesthetics. Methodology: A total of 190 individuals (92 males and 98 females) aged between 18 and 25 years, living in different cities of Turkey and studying at Atatürk University, Faculty of Dentistry were included in the study. In the study, the smile types, smile lines, maxillary incisal curvatures and buccal corridor widths of the individuals were examined. Results: In the young Turkish population, the most common ST in both genders is the commissural smile, and the least common ST is the complex smile. The most common SL is the SL, and the least common SL is the high SL, and it varies by gender. While the most common ML is the convex line in both genders, the least common ML is the reverse incisal line. While the last visible maxillary tooth during the social smile is mostly the maxillary 2nd premolar tooth, it is the maxillary 2nd molar tooth at least. Conclusion: The incidence of some smile parameters in young Turkish population varies according to gender.

Use of autonomous maximal smile to evaluate dental and gingival exposure.

ObjectiveThis study was performed to validate the autonomous maximal smile (AMS) as a new reference for evaluating dental and gingival exposure.MethodsDigital video clips of 100 volunteers showing posed smiles and AMS at different verbal directives were recorded for evaluation a total of three times at 1-week intervals. Lip-teeth relationship width (LTRW) and buccal corridor width (BCW) were measured. LTRW represented the vertical distance between the inferior border of the upper vermilion and the edge of the maxillary central incisors. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) for reproducibility, and the m-value (minimum number of repeated measurements required for an ICC level over 0.75), were calculated.ResultsLTRW and BCW of the AMS were 1.41 and 2.04 mm, respectively, greater than those of the posed smile (p < 0.05), indicating significantly larger dental and gingival exposure in the AMS. The reproducibility of the AMS (0.74 to 0.77) was excellent, and higher than that of the posed smile (0.62 to 0.65), which had fair-to-good reproducibility. Moreover, the m-value of the AMS (0.88 to 1.05) was lower than that of the posed smile (1.59 to 1.85).ConclusionsCompared to the posed smile, the AMS shows significantly larger LTRW and BCW, with significantly higher reproducibility. The AMS might serve as an adjunctive reference, in addition to the posed smile, in orthodontic and other dentomaxillofacial treatments.

Smile Attractiveness: Differences among the Perceptions of Dental Professionals and Laypersons.

The aim of this study was to analyze the acceptable values of female and male smile attractiveness based on different amounts of gingival display and buccal corridor widths, as judged by dental professionals and laypersons. The frontal smile photographs of a male and female model were modified to create seven different smile photographs of the same individual with different amounts of gingival display and buccal corridor widths. Overall, 249 evaluators in four groups (Group 1=orthodontists, Group 2=prosthodontists, Group 3=oral surgeons, and Group 4=laypersons) evaluated 28 images of different smiles with a visual analogue scale. Significant statistical differences were found among the evaluator's scores (p<0.05). For female smiles, the highest scores were obtained for 12% and 0% buccal corridor width. For male smiles, the highest scores were obtained for 4%, 0%, 12%, and 16% buccal corridor width for Groups 1, 2, 3, and 4 respectively. The highest scores were obtained for +2 mm and -3 mm of gingival display for female smiles. The amount of gingival display, the buccal corridor width, and the knowledge in the field affects the perceptions of smile attractiveness. Thus, 3 mm of gingival display and buccal corridor width larger than 16% should be avoided for esthetic reasons during dental treatment.

Influence of masseter muscle thickness on buccal corridor space and craniofacial morphology: A correlative study

Purpose: The present study was designed to evaluate the influence of masseter muscle thickness on buccal corridor space and underlying craniofacial morphology. Materials and Methods: Forty-six young adults (23 males and 23 females) in the age group of 18–23 years having intact dentitions and Class I molar relationship were included in the study. Masseter muscle thickness was measured using ultrasonography in relaxed, smiling, and contracted states. Posed smile photographs were taken to measure the buccal corridor space. Standardized frontal and lateral cephalograms were taken to determine craniofacial morphology in all three dimensions. Results: The mean masseter muscle thickness was 10.54 (±1.92) mm, 12.00 (±2.06) mm, and 14.04 (±1.99) mm in relaxed, smiling, and contracted states, respectively. Statistically significant correlation also was noted between masseter muscle thickness, during contracted state and buccal corridor width ratio. There was a strong association of masseter muscle thickness on both vertical as well as transverse craniofacial morphologies. Conclusions: Masseter muscle thickness is positively correlated with the buccal corridor width and influences both vertical as well as transverse facial dimensions.

Maxillary arch width and buccal corridor changes with Damon and conventional brackets: A retrospective analysis.

To evaluate the effect of Damon self-ligating and conventional bracket systems on buccal corridor widths and areas. A retrospective sample of consecutively treated patients using either conventional (CG, n = 45) or Damon self-ligating (SL, n = 39) brackets was analyzed to determine any differences in buccal corridor widths and areas both within and between groups. Pretreatment and posttreatment frontal photographs were transferred to Photoshop CC, standardized using intercanthal width, and linear and area measurements were performed with tools in Photoshop CC. Ratios were then calculated for statistical analysis. Relationships between arch widths and buccal corridors were also examined. There were no significant differences in the posttreatment intercanine or intermolar widths either within or between the CG and SL groups. There were no significant differences in any buccal corridor width or area measurement either within or between the CG and SL groups. There were strong correlations with the intercanine width and the corresponding buccal corridor smile width measurements. There was an inverse correlation with the buccal corridor area in relation to the canine and the total smile width. It is likely that posttreatment increases in arch width can be seen in patients treated with either a conventional bracket system or the Damon system. It is highly unlikely that there is any significant difference in buccal corridor width or area in patients treated with the Damon self-ligating system or a conventional bracket system.

Maxillary arch width and buccal corridor changes with orthodontic treatment. Part 2: Attractiveness of the frontal facial smile in extraction and nonextraction outcomes

This study was designed to assess the influence that the buccal corridor might have on the frontal facial attractiveness of subjects who had received orthodontic treatment with or without 4 premolar extractions. Posttreatment full-face frontal smiling photographs of 30 premolar extraction and 27 nonextraction patients were evaluated by 20 orthodontists, 20 dentists, and 20 laypeople using a visual analog scale. The ratings were analyzed according to rater group, rater sex, and number of years in practice for orthodontists and dentists to search for any statistically significant differences in the ratings on the basis of treatment groups, subject sex, and buccal corridor widths and areas. Orthodontists and dentists gave higher mean overall frontal facial attractiveness scores than did laypeople. There were no significant differences in how men and women rated the study subjects. The number of years in practice did not affect how the orthodontists rated, but it did affect the ratings of the dentists. Female subjects were consistently rated as significantly more attractive than male subjects. There was no difference in ratings for the extraction and nonextraction subject groups. The buccal corridor widths and areas did not affect the frontal facial attractiveness ratings. If treatment has been carried out with thorough diagnosis and careful planning, neither the choice of extraction or nonextraction treatment, nor the resulting buccal corridor widths or areas appeared to affect the subjects' frontal facial attractiveness.