Citation Information :
Hashim S, Shetty SG, Khan FA, Nirayath KJ, Arvind R. Assessment of Computer-aided Prediction for Soft Tissue Changes in Skeletal Class II Camouflage-treated Cases. World J Dent 2023; 14 (10):901-906.
Aim: To assess soft tissue (ST) responses to camouflage orthodontic treatment in patients with class II skeletal patterns.
Materials and methods: Based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria, pre- and posttreatment cephalometric radiographs of 37 young adult patients were imported, digitized, and superimposed. The posttreatment values were inserted in the “Goals” tab of the “Treatment Simulation” section of the Dolphin imaging software. The Dolphin imaging software predicted a posttreatment cephalogram. The Dolphin measurement function was used to record the values of ST changes from the actual posttreatment and the predicted treatment outcomes. The discrepancies in ST changes between predicted and actual values were calculated.
Results: Soft tissue (ST) subnasale to H-line, upper lip strain (ULS), and inferior sulcus (IS) to H-line (IS–H-line) showed statistically significant differences from the actual changes. The prediction of all the parameters except for ULS and IS to H-line was underestimated.
Conclusion: This study showed that the most accurate prediction was found in nose prominence (NP) and superior sulcus depth (SSD), and the most inaccurate prediction was found in ST subnasale to the H-line. Therefore, with caution, Dolphin imaging software can be used for ST prediction and patient education.
Clinical significance: Treatment forecast is crucial and beneficial in borderline and camouflage cases to predict the posttreatment changes to the face and develop alternate treatment plans, especially in patients with esthetic concerns.
Bishara SE. Class II malocclusions: diagnostic and clinical considerations with and without treatment. Sem Orthodont 2006;12(1):11–24. DOI: 10.1053/j.sodo.2005.10.005
Raposo R, Peleteiro B, Paço M, et al. Orthodontic camouflage versus orthodontic-orthognathic surgical treatment in class II malocclusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2018;47(4):445–455. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijom.2017.09.003
Almansob Y, Jubari M, Li A, et al. Patient's facial soft tissue changes following the orthodontics treatment. IOSR J Dent Med Sci 2019;18:69–78. DOI: 10.9790/0853-1804116978
Turley PK. Evolution of esthetic considerations in orthodontics. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2015;148(3):374–379. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2015.06.010
Erten O, Yılmaz BN. Three-dimensional imaging in orthodontics. Turk J Orthod 2018;31(3):86–94. DOI: 10.5152/TurkJOrthod.2018.17041
Lu CH, Ko EW, Huang CS. The accuracy of video imaging prediction in soft tissue outcome after bimaxillary orthognathic surgery. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2003;61(3):333–342. DOI: 10.1053/joms.2003.50058
Pektas ZO, Kircelli BH, Cilasun U, et al. The accuracy of computer-assisted surgical planning in soft tissue prediction following orthognathic surgery. Int J Med Robot 2007;3:64–71. DOI: 10.1002/rcs.127
Zhang X, Mei L, Yan X, et al. Accuracy of computer-aided prediction in soft tissue changes after orthodontic treatment. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2019;156(6):823–831. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2018.11.021
Ahmad Akhoundi, Shirani G, Arshad M, et al. Comparison of an imaging software and manual prediction of soft tissue changes after orthognathic surgery. J Dent (Tehran) 2012;9(3):178–187. PMID: 23119126.
Peterman RJ, Jiang S, Johe R, et al. Accuracy of Dolphin visual treatment objective (VTO) prediction software on class III patients treated with maxillary advancement and mandibular setback. Prog Orthod 2016;17(1):19. DOI: 10.1186/s40510-016-0132-2
Hodges A, Rossouw PE, Campbell PM, et al. Prediction of lip response to four first premolar extractions in white female adolescents and adults. Angle Orthod 2009;79(3):413–421. DOI: 10.2319/050208-247.1
Kuhn M, Markic G, Doulis I, et al. Effect of different incisor movements on the soft tissue profile measured in reference to a rough-surfaced palatal implant. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2016;149(3):349–357. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2015.08.017
Shirvani A, Sadeghian S, Abbasi S. Prediction of lip response to orthodontic treatment using a multivariable regression model. Dent Res J (Isfahan) 2016;13(1):38–45. DOI: 10.4103/1735-3327.174697
Mirabella D, Quartarone L, Lombardo L, et al. Assessment of lower lip changes following incisor displacement in 92 orthodontically-treated adults. Int Orthod 2012;10(3):289–310. DOI: 10.1016/j.ortho.2012.06.011
Kolokitha OE, Chatzistavrou E. Factors influencing the accuracy of cephalometric prediction of soft tissue profile changes following orthognathic surgery. J Maxillofac Oral Surg 2012;11(1):82–90. DOI: 10.1007/s12663-011-0253-6
Solem RC, Marasco R, Guiterrez-Pulido L, et al. Three-dimensional soft-tissue and hard-tissue changes in the treatment of bimaxillary protrusion. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2013;144(2):218–228. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2013.03.018
Maetevorakul S, Viteporn S. Factors influencing soft tissue profile changes following orthodontic treatment in patients with class II Division 1 malocclusion. Prog Orthod 2016;17:13. DOI: 10.1186/s40510-016-0125-1
Resnick CM, Dang RR, Glick SJ, et al. Accuracy of three-dimensional soft tissue prediction for Le Fort I osteotomy using Dolphin 3D software: a pilot study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2017;46(3):289–295. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijom.2016.10.016
Yashwant V A, K R, Arumugam E. Comparative evaluation of soft tissue changes in class I borderline patients treated with extraction and nonextraction modalities. Dental Press J Orthod 2016;21(4):50–59. DOI: 10.1590/2177-6709.21.4.050-059.oar