Introduction: To treat dentofacial deformities the maxillofacial surgeons must make a surgical cephalometric prediction, that can predict which will be the changes in the profile of patients after orthognathic surgery, known as visualization of the treatment objectives (VTO). There are different methods for doing a VTO, by software or manually.

Objective: Describe differences between different manual VTO’s by measuring distances between cephalometric points, facial profile and cephalometric planes between lateral radiography and VTO.

Methodology: Twenty maxillofacial surgeons will do a manual VTO, ten for class II patient and others a class III.

Outcomes: For both, class II and III patients, there was a greater variability for the cephalometric points located in the mandible. In respect to measures of facial profile most of the surgeons for class II patient do not alter the vertical A measure. The major variability was in the G measure. For class III, the A measure changes in all VTO’s. The B measure had the bigger variability. In the cephalometric planes analysis, both class II and III, the jaw planes were more variable. The surgeons did not make the same surgical movements for the same patient, and the changes in the soft tissue are not proportional respect hard tissue. Despite this differences, the profile that are drawing in the different VTO’s are similar for both patients.

Conclusions: Were found differences between the VTO’s done by different maxillofacial surgeons for the same patient. The differences between VTO’s are dependent on the professional who does them.

Conflict of interest: None declared.