Info The Cervicomental Angle

[Pendejo]

The cervicomental angle (or submental-cervical angle) is the angle formed by 2 lines from the chin and sternal notch that meet at the hyoid bone.



Ideally the cervicomental angle should be between 90 and 120 degrees, anything higher than that is considered blunted and obtuse.
The lower the angle (within the 90º - 120º range), the better.

Spoiler: Study about the ideal cervicomental angle

Submental-Cervical Angle: Perceived Attractiveness and Threshold Values of Desire for Surgery

The submental-cervical angle may alter as a result of mandibular orthognathic surgery and/or the ageing process and is therefore an important facial aesthetic parameter for comparative diagnosis and treatment planning. The purpose of this study was to undertake a quantitative evaluation of the...

link.springer.com

The submental-cervical angle of the idealized profile image was altered in 5° increments from 90° to 130°, in order to represent variations in the angle and morphology of this region (Fig.1).

Fig. 1 Submental-cervical angle of the idealized profile image was altered in 5° increments from 90° to 130°

Observers

Based on the results of a pilot study and power calculation, 185 observers took part in the study, separated into three groups (pre-treatment orthognathic patients, laypeople and clinicians; Table1), with the following selection criteria:

• Orthognathic patients pretreatment (only 1 consultation appointment); primary concern was facial appearance; no previous orthodontic or facial surgical treatment; no history of facial trauma; no severe psychological issues, e.g. body dysmorphic disorder.
• Laypeople no previous orthodontic or facial surgical treatment; no facial deformities; no history of facial trauma.
• Clinicians involved in the management of patients with facial deformities. This group included 19 clinicians in oral and maxillofacial surgery and 16 orthodontists, with 1–16 years of experience in the clinical management of patients requiring orthognathic surgery.

The age of the 185 observers was median 25 years (range 13–79 years). For the patient group the age was median 18 (range 13–60) years, for lay people 27 (range 16–79) and for clinicians 32 (range 24–39) years. Regarding ethnicity, 111 of the observers were white Caucasian, 68 were Asian, 3 were oriental, 1 was black and 2 another ethnicity. Of the 75 patients and lay people, 32 and 24 were males respectively and 11 of the 35 clinicians were males.



Questionnaire

Each observer was given a questionnaire and asked to provide the following information: age, gender, ethnic origin, how would you rate the attractiveness of your facial appearance, and how important do you think it is to have an attractive facial appearance. An instruction sheet accompanied the questionnaire, asking the observers to rate each image in terms of facial attractiveness using the following rating scale:

1. Extremely unattractive.
2. Very unattractive.
3. Slightly unattractive.
4. Neither attractive nor unattractive.
5. Slightly attractive.
6. Very attractive.
7. Extremely attractive.

Perceived Attractiveness of Images
Table 3 indicates the median attractiveness rating of the observers on a Likert scale from 1 to 7, where 1 indicates ‘extremely unattractive’ and 7 indicates ‘extremely attractive’



Most Attractive and Least Attractive Images
Table 4 demonstrates the data in rank order from most to least attractive, sorted on the basis of responses from the clinician group. The rank ordering observed in the clinician group from most attractive to least attractive is also seen in the patient and lay people groups.



Conclusions
The results of the present investigation demonstrate that a submental-cervical angle of 90°–105° is deemed acceptable. Angles above this value begin to be perceived as unattractive, though up to 120° is deemed only slightly unattractive by the lay and clinician groups, but very unattractive by the patient group. By 125°–130° all groups perceive the submental-cervical angle as very/extremely unattractive.

The cervicomental angle is very important as it affects how the rest of the face is perceived:

Figure 21.22 Identical facial profiles varying only in the submental-cervical contour; the submental-cervical contour may influence the perceived aesthetics of the other facial prominences (forehead, nose, lips and chin).

Things that contribute to the appearance of a suboptimal cervicomental angle are:

• Excess of fat on the submental area
• Redundant skin on the submental area
• Short submental length
  This may be due to a recessed chin (microgenia) and/or mandible (retrognathia)
• Low and/or forward hyoid bone position
• Lax platysma muscles
• Large submandibular glands
  
  

 

[Dr. Vozcuk [Unblocked]]

The cervicomental angle (or submental-cervical angle) is the angle formed by 2 lines from the chin and sternal notch that meet at the hyoid bone.

View attachment 10040

Ideally the cervicomental angle should be between 90 and 120 degrees, anything higher than that is considered blunted and obtuse.
The lower the angle (within the 90º - 120º range), the better.

Spoiler: Study about the ideal cervicomental angle

Submental-Cervical Angle: Perceived Attractiveness and Threshold Values of Desire for Surgery

The submental-cervical angle may alter as a result of mandibular orthognathic surgery and/or the ageing process and is therefore an important facial aesthetic parameter for comparative diagnosis and treatment planning. The purpose of this study was to undertake a quantitative evaluation of the...

link.springer.com

The submental-cervical angle of the idealized profile image was altered in 5° increments from 90° to 130°, in order to represent variations in the angle and morphology of this region (Fig.1).
View attachment 10045



Observers

Based on the results of a pilot study and power calculation, 185 observers took part in the study, separated into three groups (pre-treatment orthognathic patients, laypeople and clinicians; Table1), with the following selection criteria:

• Orthognathic patients pretreatment (only 1 consultation appointment); primary concern was facial appearance; no previous orthodontic or facial surgical treatment; no history of facial trauma; no severe psychological issues, e.g. body dysmorphic disorder.
• Laypeople no previous orthodontic or facial surgical treatment; no facial deformities; no history of facial trauma.
• Clinicians involved in the management of patients with facial deformities. This group included 19 clinicians in oral and maxillofacial surgery and 16 orthodontists, with 1–16 years of experience in the clinical management of patients requiring orthognathic surgery.

The age of the 185 observers was median 25 years (range 13–79 years). For the patient group the age was median 18 (range 13–60) years, for lay people 27 (range 16–79) and for clinicians 32 (range 24–39) years. Regarding ethnicity, 111 of the observers were white Caucasian, 68 were Asian, 3 were oriental, 1 was black and 2 another ethnicity. Of the 75 patients and lay people, 32 and 24 were males respectively and 11 of the 35 clinicians were males.

View attachment 10048

Questionnaire

Each observer was given a questionnaire and asked to provide the following information: age, gender, ethnic origin, how would you rate the attractiveness of your facial appearance, and how important do you think it is to have an attractive facial appearance. An instruction sheet accompanied the questionnaire, asking the observers to rate each image in terms of facial attractiveness using the following rating scale:

1. Extremely unattractive.
2. Very unattractive.
3. Slightly unattractive.
4. Neither attractive nor unattractive.
5. Slightly attractive.
6. Very attractive.
7. Extremely attractive.

Perceived Attractiveness of Images
Table 3 indicates the median attractiveness rating of the observers on a Likert scale from 1 to 7, where 1 indicates ‘extremely unattractive’ and 7 indicates ‘extremely attractive’

View attachment 10055

Most Attractive and Least Attractive Images
Table 4 demonstrates the data in rank order from most to least attractive, sorted on the basis of responses from the clinician group. The rank ordering observed in the clinician group from most attractive to least attractive is also seen in the patient and lay people groups.

View attachment 10056

Conclusions
The results of the present investigation demonstrate that a submental-cervical angle of 90°–105° is deemed acceptable. Angles above this value begin to be perceived as unattractive, though up to 120° is deemed only slightly unattractive by the lay and clinician groups, but very unattractive by the patient group. By 125°–130° all groups perceive the submental-cervical angle as very/extremely unattractive.

The cervicomental angle is very important as it affects how the rest of the face is perceived:
View attachment 10064



Things that contribute to the appearance of a suboptimal cervicomental angle are:

• Excess of fat on the submental area
• Redundant skin on the submental area
• Short submental length
  This may be due to a recessed chin (microgenia) and/or mandible (retrognathia)
• Low and/or forward hyoid bone position
• Lax platysma muscles
• Large submandibular glands
  
  View attachment 20499

I have good positioned hyoid, but my mandible sucks

 

[Rkelly]

The cervicomental angle (or submental-cervical angle) is the angle formed by 2 lines from the chin and sternal notch that meet at the hyoid bone.

View attachment 10040

Ideally the cervicomental angle should be between 90 and 120 degrees, anything higher than that is considered blunted and obtuse.
The lower the angle (within the 90º - 120º range), the better.

Spoiler: Study about the ideal cervicomental angle

Submental-Cervical Angle: Perceived Attractiveness and Threshold Values of Desire for Surgery

The submental-cervical angle may alter as a result of mandibular orthognathic surgery and/or the ageing process and is therefore an important facial aesthetic parameter for comparative diagnosis and treatment planning. The purpose of this study was to undertake a quantitative evaluation of the...

link.springer.com

The submental-cervical angle of the idealized profile image was altered in 5° increments from 90° to 130°, in order to represent variations in the angle and morphology of this region (Fig.1).
View attachment 10045



Observers

Based on the results of a pilot study and power calculation, 185 observers took part in the study, separated into three groups (pre-treatment orthognathic patients, laypeople and clinicians; Table1), with the following selection criteria:

• Orthognathic patients pretreatment (only 1 consultation appointment); primary concern was facial appearance; no previous orthodontic or facial surgical treatment; no history of facial trauma; no severe psychological issues, e.g. body dysmorphic disorder.
• Laypeople no previous orthodontic or facial surgical treatment; no facial deformities; no history of facial trauma.
• Clinicians involved in the management of patients with facial deformities. This group included 19 clinicians in oral and maxillofacial surgery and 16 orthodontists, with 1–16 years of experience in the clinical management of patients requiring orthognathic surgery.

The age of the 185 observers was median 25 years (range 13–79 years). For the patient group the age was median 18 (range 13–60) years, for lay people 27 (range 16–79) and for clinicians 32 (range 24–39) years. Regarding ethnicity, 111 of the observers were white Caucasian, 68 were Asian, 3 were oriental, 1 was black and 2 another ethnicity. Of the 75 patients and lay people, 32 and 24 were males respectively and 11 of the 35 clinicians were males.

View attachment 10048

Questionnaire

Each observer was given a questionnaire and asked to provide the following information: age, gender, ethnic origin, how would you rate the attractiveness of your facial appearance, and how important do you think it is to have an attractive facial appearance. An instruction sheet accompanied the questionnaire, asking the observers to rate each image in terms of facial attractiveness using the following rating scale:

1. Extremely unattractive.
2. Very unattractive.
3. Slightly unattractive.
4. Neither attractive nor unattractive.
5. Slightly attractive.
6. Very attractive.
7. Extremely attractive.

Perceived Attractiveness of Images
Table 3 indicates the median attractiveness rating of the observers on a Likert scale from 1 to 7, where 1 indicates ‘extremely unattractive’ and 7 indicates ‘extremely attractive’

View attachment 10055

Most Attractive and Least Attractive Images
Table 4 demonstrates the data in rank order from most to least attractive, sorted on the basis of responses from the clinician group. The rank ordering observed in the clinician group from most attractive to least attractive is also seen in the patient and lay people groups.

View attachment 10056

Conclusions
The results of the present investigation demonstrate that a submental-cervical angle of 90°–105° is deemed acceptable. Angles above this value begin to be perceived as unattractive, though up to 120° is deemed only slightly unattractive by the lay and clinician groups, but very unattractive by the patient group. By 125°–130° all groups perceive the submental-cervical angle as very/extremely unattractive.

The cervicomental angle is very important as it affects how the rest of the face is perceived:
View attachment 10064



Things that contribute to the appearance of a suboptimal cervicomental angle are:

• Excess of fat on the submental area
• Redundant skin on the submental area
• Short submental length
  This may be due to a recessed chin (microgenia) and/or mandible (retrognathia)
• Low and/or forward hyoid bone position
• Lax platysma muscles
• Large submandibular glands
  
  View attachment 20499

What if your angle is less than 90
Is that really good or just too much

 

[Pendejo]

What if your angle is less than 90
Is that really good or just too much

Too much, it means that your gonial angle is too high.