medigraphic.com
Anales de Otorrinolaringología Mexicana

2021, Number 4

<< Back Next >>

Otorrinolaringología 2021; 66 (4)

Facial analysis of Mexican population in Mexico City

Valdelamar-Dehesa A, Fernández-Andrade FM, Taniyama-López ON, Elnecavé-Olaiz A

Language: Spanish
References: 14
Page: 263-270
PDF size: 226.65 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Background: To inform the most frequent measures and proportions found in the Mexican population, specifically in Mexico City, and to compare them with the most frequently accepted beauty standards in the literature.
Materials and Methods: A prospective, descriptive, observational, comparative study, conducted from August 1st to December 30th, 2019. Clinical photographs of Mexican patients between 18 and 35 years of age, of either sex, residing in Mexico City were obtained. A comparative analysis between both sexes was also performed. The nasal projection was determined and the level of the radix was indicated.
Results: The facial clinical analysis of 114 people, between 18 to 35 years old, men and women of Mexican nationality was performed. The reported angles were: nasofrontal, nasofacial, nasolabial, mentocervical and nasomental. In comparison to the ideal values, a statistically significant difference was found for all the variables reported for the Mexican population. Only the nasofacial and mentocervical angles differed significantly between both sexes. The most frequent position of the radix was a level of the ciliary margin.
Conclusions: It is of great importance to know the anthropometric characteristics of each population and how they differ from what is considered ideal in the interna- tional literature. This work could be complementary with other studies that determine aesthetically desirable values for the Mexican population.


REFERENCES

  1. Fedok FG, MC Burnett, Billingsley EM. Small nasal defects. Otolaryngol Clin North Am 2001; 34 (4): 671-94. doi: 10.1016/s0030-6665(05)70013-x.

  2. Uzun A, Ozdemir F. Morphometric analysis of nasal shape and angles in young adults. Braz J Otorhinolaryngol 2014; 80 (5): 397-402. doi: 10.1016/j.bjorl.2014.07.010.

  3. Rohrich, RJ, Ahmad J. Rhinoplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg 2011; 128 (2): 49e-73e.

  4. Park J, Suhk J, Nguyen H. Nasal analysis and anatomy: Anthropometric proportional assessment in Asiansaesthetic balance from forehead to chin, Part II. Semin Plast Surg 2015; 29 (4): 226-31. doi: 10.1055/s-0035-1564818.

  5. Ballin, AC, Carvalho B, Lutaif J E, Becker R, Berger C, Mocellin M. Anthropometric study of the Caucasian nose in the city of Curitiba: relevance of population evaluation. Braz J Otorhinolaryngol 2018; 84 (4): 486-493. doi: 10.1016/j. bjorl.2017.06.004.

  6. Leong S, White P. A comparison of aesthetic proportions between the healthy Caucasian nose and the aesthetic ideal. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2006; 59 (3): 248-52. doi: 10.1016/j.bjps.2005.08.008.

  7. Rohrich, Rod J, et al. Dallas rhinoplasty: Nasal surgery by the masters. 3rd ed. Taylor & Francis Group, LLC. 2014.

  8. Burgué J. La cara, sus proporciones estéticas. Clínica Central Cira García, La Habana. Cuba.

  9. Husein O F, Sepehr A, Garg R, Sina-Khadiv M, Gattu S, Waltzman J, et al. Anthropometric and aesthetic analysis of the Indian American woman’s face. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2010; 63 (11): 1825-31. doi: 10.1016/j. bjps.2009.10.032.

  10. Farkas LG, Hreczko TA, Kolar JC, Munro I. Vertical and horizontal proportions of the face in young adult North American Caucasians: revision of neoclassical canons. Plast Reconstr Surg 1985; 75: 328e38. doi: 10.1097/00006534- 198503000-00005.

  11. Farkas LG, Katic MJ, Forrest CR, Alt KW, Bagic I, Baltadjiev G, et al. International anthropometric study of facial morphology in various ethnic groups/races. J Craniofac Surg 2005; 16: 615e46. doi: 10.1097/01.scs.0000171847.58031.9e.

  12. Aymes-García l, Fandiño-izundegui J. Ángulos nasofaciales en adultos mayores. An Orl Mex 2011; 56 (1): 11-14.

  13. Cacho M, Zepeda E, Ortega F. Normas del perfil facial blando en niños michoacanos con el análisis de Powell. Revista Latinoamericana de Ortodoncia y Odontopediatría Ortodoncia.ws edición electrónica mayo 2011.

  14. Doddi NM, Eccles R. The role of anthropometric measurements in nasal surgery and research: a systematic review. Clin Otolaryngol 2010; 35 (4): 277-83. doi: 10.1111/j.1749- 4486.2010.02169.x.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com