Three-dimensional evaluation of social smile asymmetry in patients with unilateral impacted maxillary canine: a 3D stereophotogrammetry study

Dindaroğlu F., Fırıncıoğulları E. C., Duran G. S.

Clinical Oral Investigations, vol.27, no.11, pp.6915-6924, 2023 (SCI-Expanded) identifier identifier identifier

  • Publication Type: Article / Article
  • Volume: 27 Issue: 11
  • Publication Date: 2023
  • Doi Number: 10.1007/s00784-023-05308-4
  • Journal Name: Clinical Oral Investigations
  • Journal Indexes: Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED), Scopus, Academic Search Premier, EMBASE, MEDLINE
  • Page Numbers: pp.6915-6924
  • Keywords: Social smile asymmetry, Unilateral impacted maxillary canine, 3D deviation analysis
  • Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart University Affiliated: No


Objective: This study aimed to evaluate social smile asymmetry in patients with unilateral impacted maxillary canine on 3D stereophotogrammetric images. Material and methods: The 3D social smile images of participants with unilateral impacted maxillary canine (n:20) and without impaction as a control group (n:20) were included. The images were recorded with a hand-held 3D stereophotogrammetry device (Fuel3D® Scanify®) and Geomagic Essentials 2 reverse engineering software were used for analyses. After the orientation process of the 3D records, the tissues around the smile area were divided into five morphological regions: cheek, upper lip lateral and medial, and lower lip lateral and medial. The deviation margins in the negative and positive directions for the 95% mesh rate and the total percentages of meshes between − 0.5- and + 0.5-mm deviations were calculated. ICC, paired samples t test, independent samples t test, and the Mann–Whitney U test were used for statistical analyses. Results: In individuals with impacted canine, the amount of maximum positive deviation in the upper lip medial was 5.64 mm ± 1.46 and maximum negative deviation was − 4.6 mm ± 1.17. In the control group, mean of deviation limits for all parameters was less than 1.19 mm ± 2.62, while in individuals with unilateral impacted maxillary canine, the maximum value was 8.34 mm ± 2.23. The mesh percentage between − 0.5 and 0.5-mm deviations was over 95% in all morphological areas in the control group, while in the impacted canine group, the number of meshes within the specified deviation limits was less than 95%. Conclusion: Individuals with unilateral impacted maxillary canine exhibit greater asymmetry in social smile compared to the control group, with the asymmetry being most prominent near the corners of the mouth and cheeks. Clinical relevance: Amount of asymmetry was higher in impaction group compared to the control group in social smile. The quantification of a possible smile asymmetry due to the impacted canine is crucial for the diagnosis and treatment planning of orthodontic and/or orthognathic cases for ideal aesthetic results. Hence, smile asymmetry should not be overlooked and should be considered in diagnosis and treatment planning.