International Journal of Clinical Pediatric Dentistry

Register      Login

VOLUME 15 , ISSUE 5 ( September-October, 2022 ) > List of Articles


Relationship of Nasolabial Angle with Maxillary Incisor Proclination and Upper Lip Thickness in North Indian Population

Hemant Garg, Daizy Khundrakpam, Vaishali Saini, Rashmi Rukshana, Kailash Kaldhari, Jagjit Kaur

Keywords : Facial esthetics, Maxillary incisor proclination, Nasolabial angle, Upper lip thickness

Citation Information : Garg H, Khundrakpam D, Saini V, Rukshana R, Kaldhari K, Kaur J. Relationship of Nasolabial Angle with Maxillary Incisor Proclination and Upper Lip Thickness in North Indian Population. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2022; 15 (5):489-492.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10005-2432

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 30-01-2023

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2022; The Author(s).


Aim: The aim of the study was to evaluate the relationship between nasolabial angle (NLA) with maxillary incisor proclination (U1-NA) and upper lip thickness (ULT). Materials and methods: Pretreatment lateral cephalometric radiographs of 120 patients were taken, and NLA, U1-NA, and basic ULT measurements were obtained for each patient. Descriptive statistics were calculated for all the variables involved in the study. The correlation was found using the Pearson correlation coefficient (r) test. p < 0.01 was considered statistically significant. Results: The mean values of NLA, upper incisor proclination, and ULT were found to be 91.38° ± 7.10°, 34.21° + 5.17°, and 15.38 ± 1.76 mm, respectively. r (r = −0.583) was found between NLA and upper incisor proclination and (r = −0.040) for NLA and ULT. Conclusion: There is a statistically significant relationship between NLA and U1-NA.

PDF Share
  1. Ashraf A, Khan H, Iqubal N. Correlation of nasolabial angle with maxillary incisor inclination and upper lip thickness. Pak Oral Dental J 2018;38(3):317–319.
  2. Ackerman JL, Proffit WR, Sarver DM. The emerging soft tissue paradigm in orthodontic diagnosis and treatment planning. Clin Orthod Res 1999;2(2):49–52. DOI: 10.1111/ocr.1999.2.2.49
  3. Dua V, Gupta S, Singh C. Evaluation of the nasolabial angle in the Indian population. Contemp Clin Dent 2010;1(2):79–82. DOI: 10.4103/0976-237X.68595
  4. Gayathri M, Arun AV. Relationship between nasolabial angle and maxillary incisor proclination in South Indian population. Drug invent today 2018;10(1):2829–2832.
  5. Finnoy JP, Wisth PJ, Boe OE. Changes in soft tissue profile during and after orthodontic treatment. Eur J Orthod 1987;9(1):68–78. DOI: 10.1093/ejo/9.1.68
  6. Hunt NP, Rudge SJ. Facial profile and orthognathic surgery. Br J Orthod 1984;11(3):126–135. DOI: 10.1179/bjo.11.3.126
  7. Lo FD, Hunter WS. Changes in nasolabial angle related to maxillary incisor retraction. Am J Orthod 1982;82(5):384–391. DOI: 10.1016/0002-9416(82)90187-7
  8. Robison JM, Rinchuse DJ, Zullo TG. Relationship of skeletal pattern and nasal form. Am J Orthod 1986;89(6):499–506. DOI: 10.1016/0002-9416(86)90008-4
  9. Hwang HS, Kim WS, McNamara JA Jr. A comparative study of two methods of quantifying the soft tissue profile. Angle Orthod 2000;70(3):200–207. DOI: 10.1043/0003-3219(2000)070<0200:ACSOTM>2.0.CO;2
  10. Sanchez M, Díaz M, Briones D, et al. Changes in the nasolabial angle associated with advance and maxillary impact surgery. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2017;46(1):330. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijom.2017.02.1112
  11. Hellak AF, Kirsten B, Schauseil M, et al. Influence of maxillary advancement surgery on skeletal and soft-tissue changes in the nose - a retrospective cone-beam computed tomography study. Head Face Med 2015;11:23. DOI: 10.1186/s13005-015-0080-y
  12. Nandini S, Prashanth CS, Somiah SK, et al. An evaluation of nasolabial angle and the relative inclinations of the nose and upper lip. J Contemp Dent Pract 2011;12(3):152–157. DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-1026
  13. Linjawi AI. Age- and gender-related incisor changes in different vertical craniofacial relationships. J Orthod Sci 2016;5(4):132–137. DOI: 10.4103/2278-0203.192116
  14. Shamlan MA, Aldrees AM. Hard and soft tissue correlations in facial profiles: a canonical correlation study. Clin Cosmet Investig Dent 2015;7:9–15. DOI: 10.2147/CCIDE.S73457
  15. Kasai K. Soft tissue adaptability to hard tissues in facial profiles. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1998;113(6):674–684. DOI: 10.1016/s0889-5406(98)70228-8
  16. Arumugam E, Duraisamy S, Ravi K, et al. Prediction of soft tissue profile changes following orthodontic retraction of incisor in South Indian females. SRM J Res Dent Sci 2012;3(1):10–14.
  17. Guan XU, Xin L, Tian PF, et al. Effect of soft tissue thickness on the morphology of lip in orthodontic treatment. Int J Morphol 2019;37(4):1245–1251. DOI: 10.4067/S0717-95022019000401245
  18. Rains MD, Nanda R. Soft tissue changes associated with maxillary incisor retraction. Am J orthod 1982;81:481–488.
  19. Hershley HG. Incisor tooth retraction and subsequent profile change in postadolescent female patients. Am J orthod 1972;61:45–54.
  20. Fitzgerald JP, Nanda RS, Currier GF. An evaluation of the nasolabial angle and the relative inclinations of the nose and upper lip. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1992;102(4):328–334. DOI: 10.1016/0889-5406(92)70048-F
  21. Burrstone CJ. The integumental profile. Am J Orthod 1958;44:1–25.
  22. Alhuwaizi AF, Mohammed SA, Al-Laban YR. The nasolabial angle and the relative inclination of the nose and upper lip in Iraqi class I sample. Iraqi Orthod J 2010;6(1):1–4.
  23. Yogosawa F. Predicting soft tissue profile changes concurrent with orthodontic treatment. Angle Orthod 1990;60(3):199–206. DOI: 10.1043/0003-3219(1990)060<0199:PSTPCC>2.0.CO;2
  24. Owen AH. Diagnostic block cephalometrics (Part I). J Clin Orthod 1984;18:400–422.
  25. Scheideman GB, Bell WH, Legan HL, et al. Cephalometric analysis of dentofacial normals. Am J Orthod 1980;78(4):404–420.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.