Kuroda S, Tanaka E. Application of temporary anchorage devices for the treatment of adult Class III malocclusions. Semin Orthod 2011;17:91-7

Temporary anchorage devices offer another alternative in the orthodontic treatment of adult patients with mild to moderate Class III malocclusion. The authors recommend using miniscrews in the posterior mandible (the retromolar pad) as direct anchorage to retract the mandibular dentition. Alternatively, miniscrews can be placed interradicularly to upright the mandibular dentition. In that case, they suggest placing them between the first molar and the second premolar, or between the first and second molars, with at least 3 mm of interradicular space. Miniplates can also be used in the posterior mandible; however, they are more invasive than miniscrews. Reports of higher failure rates of miniscrews placed in the posterior mandible have led some clinicians to place temporary anchorage devices in the posterior maxilla and use them indirectly as anchorage for Class III elastics. This method allows retraction of the mandibular teeth while preventing unwanted proclination of the maxillary incisors and extrusion of the maxillary posterior teeth. Several studies support the combined use of orthognathic surgery and temporary anchorage devices to facilitate tooth movement in the treatment of severe Class III patients. Absolute intrusion of the maxillary molars with temporary anchorage devices has also been reported. However, molar intrusion might be contraindicated in some Class III patients, since autorotation of the mandible as a result of molar intrusion can increase the projection of the chin. The authors advocate their method as an alternative to maxillary impaction surgery in Class III patients with anterior open bites and canted occlusal planes. Orthodontic correction of Class III malocclusion does not generally improve facial esthetics, and the treatment decision should be made in conjunction with assessmentS of the position of the teeth in the face, the smile, and the chin projection.

Reviewed by Jennifer Mazzarella

Iglesias-Linares A, Yanez-Vico R, Moreno-Manteca B, Moreno-Fernandez A, Mendoza-Mendoza A, Solano-Reina E. Common standards in facial esthetics: craniofacial analysis of most attractive black and white subjects according to People magazine during previous 10 years. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2011;69:e216-24

As the world has become figuratively smaller with an increasing acceptance of the blending of ethnicities and cultures, new standards of beauty have emerged. In terms of both overall facial and profile esthetics, it is questioned what features are deemed “beautiful.” The primary purpose of this case-control study was to determine any common measurable esthetic parameters between 2 distinct groupings of People magazine’s 10 most recent annual listings of the most beautiful people. Eighty women (40 black, 40 white) were included in the study. Their lateral photographs were accessed online, and then oriented and size-corrected. Photogrammetric analysis was performed on each picture by 1 examiner to obtain both angular and proportional measurements.

Statistical differences between groups were analyzed by using the Student t test. Commonality between the 2 groups was found for the angle of the lower third, labiomental angle, angle of facial convexity, cervicomental angle, and projection of the upper and lower lips. There were similarities in the lower part of the face when comparing the 2 groups, disregarding obvious differences in protrusion between the groups. The authors concluded that the concept of beauty and facial balance is evolving, with a predilection for increases in facial convexity and lip protrusion. Those considered beautiful had strikingly similar characteristics, incorporating both typical predominantly black and white features. Clinicians need to accept the challenge of creating well-balanced and esthetically pleasing faces in an ever-changing world.

Reviewed by Marissa Cooper

Iglesias-Linares A, Yanez-Vico R, Moreno-Manteca B, Moreno-Fernandez A, Mendoza-Mendoza A, Solano-Reina E. Common standards in facial esthetics: craniofacial analysis of most attractive black and white subjects according to People magazine during previous 10 years. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2011;69:e216-24

As the world has become figuratively smaller with an increasing acceptance of the blending of ethnicities and cultures, new standards of beauty have emerged. In terms of both overall facial and profile esthetics, it is questioned what features are deemed “beautiful.” The primary purpose of this case-control study was to determine any common measurable esthetic parameters between 2 distinct groupings of People magazine’s 10 most recent annual listings of the most beautiful people. Eighty women (40 black, 40 white) were included in the study. Their lateral photographs were accessed online, and then oriented and size-corrected. Photogrammetric analysis was performed on each picture by 1 examiner to obtain both angular and proportional measurements.

Statistical differences between groups were analyzed by using the Student t test. Commonality between the 2 groups was found for the angle of the lower third, labiomental angle, angle of facial convexity, cervicomental angle, and projection of the upper and lower lips. There were similarities in the lower part of the face when comparing the 2 groups, disregarding obvious differences in protrusion between the groups. The authors concluded that the concept of beauty and facial balance is evolving, with a predilection for increases in facial convexity and lip protrusion. Those considered beautiful had strikingly similar characteristics, incorporating both typical predominantly black and white features. Clinicians need to accept the challenge of creating well-balanced and esthetically pleasing faces in an ever-changing world.

Reviewed by Marissa Cooper