【作者】 侯彦；

【导师】 董福生；

【作者基本信息】 河北医科大学 ， 外科学， 2012， 博士

【摘要】 目的:人体颅颌面部的发育畸形、颌面创伤以及外科手术的修复、矫正治疗均需要根据其结构、功能进行设计，同时亦要从美学角度考虑。目前，国外正畸、正颌、美容医学、整形外科等学科的学者们针对面部的美学评价进行了较为深入的研究，而国内对此问题的探讨相对较少。本研究应用Steiner、Ricketts、Downs、Wylie、Tweed、McNamara、Holdaway、Burstone等多种头影测量方法，对中国汉族青年美貌人群进行分析，筛选出对美学起主要作用的若干美学指标，建立回归方程，以期为临床诊治提供参考标准；应用三维光学扫描的测量方法研究中国汉族青年美貌人群的软组织特征，总结出标准值应用于临床，指导正畸矫治的设计以及正颌手术方案的制定并从美学角度来研究颅颌面特征，为虚拟颌面整形手术系统软件的开发提供必要的参考数据；应用三维光学扫描的测量方法研究中国汉族青年美貌人群的微笑特征，以指导临床进行矫治方案的调整以及便于和患者及家长进行交流，进而评价治疗效果。方法:研究对象：①正常牙合人群中筛选出的美貌人群②安氏Ⅱ类牙合人群。正常牙合人群的标准为：①符合正常牙合标准，磨牙关系中性，覆牙合、覆盖关系正常；②五官端正，侧貌轮廊协调均衡；③正位左右对称，面部三等分协调；④无美容整复手术及正畸治疗史、正颌治疗史；⑤开口度及开口型正常范围，无颞下颌关节疾患；⑥身体健康，牙齿发育良好。正常牙合美貌人群评价计分：对正常牙合人群侧貌剪影由专业及非专业人员构成的评价组（8人）进行评价计分；评价计分为5分：好（5分），较好（4分），一般（3分），较差（2分），差（1分）。评价方法：每幅剪影幻灯播放30秒钟，记录评价组成员每幅计分，最终所有评价组成员一致打分在3分以上者纳入美貌人群。安氏Ⅱ类牙合人群的标准为：①身体健康，无系统性疾病；②双侧磨牙为Angle Ⅱ类关系,面型为Ⅱ类骨面型③无美容整复手术及正畸治疗史、正颌治疗史。第一部分：中国汉族青年颅颌面特征的X线头影测量研究正常牙合美貌人群筛选：检查河北医科大学以及石家庄经济学院在校学生5500人，按照正常牙合人群的标准，最终选出100名正常牙合人群，50名男性，50名女性，汉族，不限地域。对正常牙合人群拍摄X线头颅侧位片。将透明硫酸纸置于打印出的正常牙合人群的头颅侧位片上，用4H铅笔将其软组织侧貌流畅描出，将描好的侧貌扫描（惠普HP F2488）输入至计算机中，应用Adobe PhotoshopCS5.0处理，得出一系列侧貌剪影，用于筛选美貌人群。对100幅侧貌剪影进行美学的主观评价，筛查得出美貌人群为研究对象，共56人（男26，女30）。安氏Ⅱ类牙合人群选择：河北医科大学附属口腔医院门诊病人，按照安氏Ⅱ类牙合人群的标准选入汉族青年60名，30名男性，30名女性。拍摄X线头颅侧位片：对正常牙合人群和安氏Ⅱ类牙合人群均拍摄X线头颅侧位片。将取得的美貌人群以及安氏Ⅱ类牙合人群头颅侧位片输入计算机,应用WinCeph软件进行依照不同头影测量方法依次定点测量。每张定点3次，间隔2周，同一人完成，取最终均值。统计分析：应用SPSS18.0对测量结果分组分类地进行统计学检验：美貌人群以及安氏Ⅱ类牙合人群各测量方法男女性别比较采用独立样本的t检验；美貌人群与安氏Ⅱ类牙合人群之间各测量方法的比较采用独立样本的t检验；中国汉族美貌人群与其他人种之间比较采用单样本的t检验；Ricketts、Burstone、Holdaway测量法中软硬组织相关性采用直线回归分析法。第二部分：中国汉族青年颅面软组织特征瞬间成像三维立体扫描分析研究对象及筛选：研究对象为正常牙合美貌人群，筛选过程与第一部分相同。颅面软组织三维立体扫描：对美貌人群应用3D CaMega人体三维扫描仪扫描面部，获取三维数据。将取得的数据输入计算机,应用CloudForm软件，进行预处理。三维立体测量：对颅面软组织三维立体扫描成像进行三次定点及软组织的各项三维立体测量。每次定点间隔2周，同一人完成，取最终均值。统计分析：应用SPSS18.0对测量结果分组分类地进行统计学检验：美貌人群三维光学测量值性别比较采用独立样本的t检验；美貌人群男女青年三维光学测量值与其他地区三维CT测量值的比较采用独立样本的t检验。第三部分：中国汉族青年颜面微笑特征瞬间成像三维立体扫描动态分析研究对象及筛选：研究对象为正常牙合美貌人群及安氏Ⅱ类牙合人群，筛选过程与第一部分相同。颅面软组织三维立体扫描：对美貌人群及安氏Ⅱ类牙合人群应用3DCaMega人体三维扫描仪扫描面部，获取三维数据。将3D CaMega人体三维扫描仪取得的静息位以及微笑位的三维数据分别地输入计算机,应用CloudForm软件，进行预处理。三维立体测量：对颅面软组织三维立体扫描成像进行三次定点及微笑特征的三维测量。每次定点间隔2周，同一人完成，取最终均值。统计分析：应用SPSS18.0对测量结果分组分类地进行统计学检验：美貌人群及安氏Ⅱ类牙合人群微笑三维光学测量值的性别比较采用独立样本的t检验；美貌人群与安氏Ⅱ类牙合人群微笑三维光学测量值的比较采用独立样本的t检验。结果:第一部分：1美貌人群男女青年X线头影测量值的性别比较Steiner分析法：SE男性小于女性；Ricketts分析法：下唇位置男性大于女性； Burstone分析法：下颏面垂直高度与深度比，上唇凸度，下唇凸度均男性大于女性；Holdaway分析法：鼻下点至H线距男性大于女性；其他分析法：U1-SN男性大于女性；McNamara分析法、Wylie分析法、Downs分析法、Tweed分析法、MEAW分析法：男女性别间无显著的统计学差异。2安氏Ⅱ类牙合人群男女青年X线头影测量值的性别比较Steiner分析法、Ricketts分析法、McNamara、Downs、Tweed分析法分析法、Holdaway分析法MEAW分析法、其他分析法等，男女性别间无显著的统计学差异；Wylie分析法：髁突后切线—蝶鞍中心距，翼上颌裂—前鼻棘距，下颌长度有统计学差异，男性大于女性；Burstone分析法：上颌凸距男性大于女性。3美貌人群与安氏Ⅱ类牙合人群X线头影测量值的比较Steiner分析法：ANB，U1-NA距，U1-NA角，L1-NB距，L1-NB角，SL，SE美貌人群小于安氏Ⅱ类牙合人群；U1-L1角美貌人群大于安氏Ⅱ类牙合人群。Ricketts分析法：上颌凸度，上中切牙突距，下中切牙突距，下中切牙倾斜度，上颌第一磨牙位置，下唇位置美貌人群小于安氏Ⅱ类牙合人群；面角美貌人群大于安氏Ⅱ类牙合人群。McNamara分析法：上颌突距，上切牙突距，下切牙突距，有效上颌长度，有效下颌长度，下前面高美貌人群小于安氏Ⅱ类牙合人群。Wylie分析法：翼上颌裂一前鼻棘距，髁突后切线一蝶鞍中心有统计学差异，美貌人群小于安氏Ⅱ类牙合人群。Downs分析法：颌凸角有统计学差异，美貌人群小于安氏Ⅱ类牙合人群。Tweed分析法：下中切牙—下颌平面角有统计学差异，美貌人群小于安氏Ⅱ类牙合人群；下中切牙—眼耳平面角有统计学差异，美貌人群大于安氏Ⅱ类牙合人群。Burstone分析法：面凸角，上唇凸度，下唇凸度，垂直唇颏长度比，唇间隙有显著的统计学差异，美貌人群小于安氏Ⅱ类牙合人群。Holdaway分析法：鼻下点至H线距，下唇至H线距离，骨骼侧面突度美貌人群小于安氏Ⅱ类牙合人群；软组织面角，鼻凸度美貌人群大于安氏Ⅱ类牙合人群。MEAW分析法：ODI有统计学差异，美貌人群小于安氏Ⅱ类牙合人群；APDI有统计学差异，美貌人群大于安氏Ⅱ类牙合人群。4中国汉族美貌人群与其他人种X线头影测量值的比较与日本人相比：Steiner分析法： SNB，SND，Pog-NB，U1-L1角，中国人大于日本人；ANB，L1-NB距，L1-NB角，Occlusal pl-SN角，GoGn-SN角，SE，中国人小于日本人。Ricketts分析法：面角，下颌弓角中国人大于日本人；下颌平面角，下面高角，上颌凸度，上颌第一磨牙位置，下唇位置，中国人小于日本人。Downs分析法：颌凸角，中国人小于日本人；Y轴角，中国人大于日本人。Tweed分析法：眼耳平面—下颌平面角，下中切牙—下颌平面角，中国人均大于日本人；下中切牙—眼耳平面角中国人均小于日本人。Burstone分析法：上颌凸距，下颜面咽喉角，下颏面垂直高度与深度比，垂直唇颏长度比，唇间隙，上切牙露出程度，中国人大于日本人；鼻唇角，下唇凸度，中国人小于日本人。Holdaway分析法：鼻下点至H线距，下唇至H线距离，H角，上唇凹深，颏部软组织厚，中国人大于日本人；上唇厚度，上唇紧张度，中国人小于日本人。与白种人相比：Steiner分析法：U1-NA距，U1-NA角，L1-NB距，L1-NB角，中国人大于白种人；U1-L1角，SL，SE，中国人小于白种人。Ricketts分析法：下颌弓角，下中切牙突距，下中切牙倾斜度，上颌第一磨牙位置，下唇位置，中国人大于白种人；面轴角，面角，中国人小于白种人。McNamara分析法：上颌突距，下颌突距，下切牙突距，中国人大于白种人；有效上颌长度，有效下颌长度，下前面高，中国人小于白种人。Wylie分析法：髁突后切线—蝶鞍中心距，下颌长度，中国人小于白种人。Downs分析法：颌凸角，Y轴角，中国人大于白种人。Tweed分析法：眼耳平面—下颌平面角，下中切牙—下颌平面角，中国人均大于白种人；下中切牙—眼耳平面角中国人均小于白种人。Burstone分析法：下颌凸距，下颜面咽喉角，下颏面垂直高度与深度比，上唇凸度，下唇凸度，中国人大于白种人；面凸角，垂直高度比，鼻唇角，中国人小于白种人。Holdaway：鼻下点至H线距，下唇至H线距离，H角，上唇凹深，颏部软组织厚，中国人大于白种人；软组织面角，鼻凸度，颏唇沟深度，上唇厚度，上唇紧张度，中国人小于白种人。MEAW分析法：APDI中国人均大于白种人。5Ricketts分析法及相关指标的回归分析Y（下唇位置）=0.447X1（上中切牙突距）+0.324X2（上颌凸度）-3.253；Y （上中切牙突距）=0.107X1（L1-NB距）+0.987X2（U1-NA距）+0.610X3（ANB）-0.445X4（Pog-NB）-0.097X5（SND）-0.037X6（U1-NA角）+7.461； Y （上颌凸度）=0.386X1（NA-PA）+0.088X2（L1-NB角）-0.106X3（U1-NA距）-1.241。6Burstone分析法及相关指标的回归分析Y（面凸角）=-0.251X1（鼻唇角）+1.122X2（下唇凸度）-19.604；Y（鼻唇角）=105.919-1.301X（U1-NA距）；Y（下唇凸度）=0.545X1（L1-NB距）+0.043X2（SNA）-2.645。7Holdaway分析法及相关指标的回归分析Y（H角）=1.118X1（鼻下点至H线距）-0.576X（2颏部软组织厚）+0.848X3（骨骼侧面突度）+0.443X4（上唇紧张度）+11.998；Y（骨骼侧面突度）=0.179X₁（NA-PA）-0.264X₂（NP-FH）+25.016；Y（鼻下点至H线距）=0.301X（L1-NB距）+6.133； Y （上唇紧张度）=0.158X1（U1-NA角）+0.079X2（SNB）-9.388第二部分：1美貌人群三维光学测量值性别比较高度的比较：鼻高，额突高，颜面高，唇高，上唇高，上面高，中面高，下面高，男性大于女性；全面高则男性小于女性。宽度的比较：口裂宽，上面宽，两眼外宽，两眼内宽，中面宽，下面宽，颧宽，男性大于女性。角度的比较：Sn-n-si男性大于女性；左n-Sn-mz/右n-Sn-mz男性小于女性。空间距离的比较： pg-（go-go），pg-（t-t），n-（t-t），Sn-（t-t），男性大于女性。头面部指数及比例关系的比较：颜面高/全头高，颜面高/中面宽，男性大于女性；中面宽/全面高，下面宽/颜面高，上面宽/上面高，下面宽/下面高，男性小于女性。侧貌的比较：颏沟倾角，软组织下颌平面角，男性小于女性。眼的比较：内眦宽，外眦宽，内眦宽/外眦宽，外眦鼻底角，中面高/外眦宽，外眦宽/颜面高，男性大于女性。鼻的比较：鼻长，鼻背长，鼻深，鼻宽，Sn-E，prn-（ls-pg），鼻宽/中面宽，鼻宽/口裂宽，鼻宽/鼻长，鼻宽/颜面高，均男性大于女性。耳的比较：耳屏间宽/头高，男性大于女性。唇的比较：口裂宽，唇高，上唇长，下唇长，人中长，上下唇突角，上唇颏突角，男性大于女性。下颌的比较：下颌升支高度，下颌支长度，下面宽，男性大于女性；颏沟倾角，软组织下颌平面角，男性小于女性。颧骨复合体的比较：颧骨间距，中面宽，男性大于女性。2美貌人群男女青年三维光学测量值与其他地区三维CT测量值的比较高度：男性显示全面高，上唇高，中面高，下面高，光学测量值大于CT测量值。女性显示额突高，颜面高，上面高，中面高，下面高，光学测量值大于CT测量值，而全面高光学测量值小于CT测量值。宽度：男性显示头最大宽光学测量值小于CT测量值；口裂宽光学测量值大于CT测量值。女性显示头最大宽光学测量值小于CT测量值。角度的比较：女性显示（n-pg）-FH，t-pg-t光学测量值大于CT测量值；额鼻角光学测量值小于CT测量值。面部指数及比例关系：男性显示下面宽/中面宽，中面宽/中面高，下面宽/下面高光学测量值小于CT学测量值；下面高/颜面高光学测量值大于CT测量值。女性：显示中面宽/全面高，下面宽/颜面高，下面宽/中面宽，中面宽/中面高，下面宽/下面高，光学测量值小于CT测量值；下面高/颜面高光学测量值大于CT测量值。侧貌的比较：女性显示鼻额角光学测量值小于CT测量值；（n-pg）-FH光学测量值大于CT测量值。眼的比较：男性显示外眦鼻底角，外眦宽/中面宽，光学测量值大于CT测量值。女性：显示外眦鼻底角，外眦宽/颜面高，光学测量值大于CT测量值。鼻的比较：男性显示鼻深，Sn-E，prn-（ls-pg）光学测量值大于CT测量值。女性显示鼻额角，鼻宽/颜面高光学测量值小于CT测量值；Sn-E，prn-（ls-pg），鼻宽/中面宽，光学测量值大于CT测量值。耳的比较：男性显示两耳屏间宽光学测量值小于CT测量值。女性显示两耳屏间宽光学测量值大于CT测量值。唇的比较：男性显示口裂宽，上唇长，光学测量值大于CT测量值。下颌的比较：男性下面宽/中面宽光学测量值小于CT测量值。女性显示面下1/2的宽度光学测量值大于CT测量值；下面宽/中面宽光学测量值小于CT测量值。颧骨复合体的比较：男性显示下面宽/中面宽光学测量值小于CT测量值。女性显示下面宽/中面宽光学测量值小于CT测量值。第三部分：1美貌人群微笑三维光学测量值的性别差异休息位鼻翼宽度，微笑位鼻翼宽度，休息位上唇长度，微笑位上唇长度，休息位口角宽度，颏点垂直移动距离，微笑时下唇上缘与左上切牙切缘距离有统计学差异，男性大于女性。2安氏Ⅱ类牙合人群微笑三维光学测量值的性别差异休息位鼻翼宽度，微笑位鼻翼宽度，休息位上唇长度，微笑位上唇长度，休息位口角宽度，微笑时下唇上缘与左上切牙切缘距离有统计学差异，男性大于女性；微笑对称率有统计学差异，男性小于女性。3美貌人群与安氏Ⅱ类牙合人群微笑三维光学测量值的比较男性：休息位上唇长度，微笑位上唇长度，微笑对称率有统计学差异，美貌人群大于安氏Ⅱ类牙合人群；上唇长度变化值，上切牙曲度，微笑时上唇下缘与左上切牙切缘距离，微笑比率有统计学差异，美貌人群小于安氏Ⅱ类牙合人群。女性：休息位上唇长度，微笑位上唇长度有统计学差异，美貌人群大于安氏Ⅱ类牙合人群；休息位口角宽度，上切牙曲度，微笑时最大牙龈暴露量有统计学差异，美貌人群小于安氏Ⅱ类牙合人群。结论:1建立Steiner、Ricketts、Downs、Wylie、Tweed、McNamara、Holdaway、Burstone等多种头影测量的中国汉族青年美貌人群标准值；从鼻、唇、颏的角度归纳出中国汉族青年美貌人群的软组织特征；找到了相关的软硬组织的指标，建立了逐步回归线性方程。2建立中国汉族青年美貌人群面部特征三维数据标准值，制定出时代特色的美貌人群的美学特征。3建立中国汉族青年美貌人群的微笑特征的三维数据标准值，归纳出中国汉族青年美貌人群的微笑特征。更多还原

【Abstract】 Objectives: Craniofacial deformity, maxillofacial trauma, surgicalrestoration and orthodontic treatment need to be designed according to itsstructure and function while the design should be considered from theperspective of aesthetics. At present, the overseas researchers in orthodontics,orthognathic, aesthetic medicine, plastic surgery and other disciplines made amore in-depth study of facial aesthetic evaluation, while our country relativelydid few. The aim of this study was to make esthetic evaluation in Chineseadults with well-balance profiles by Steiner analysis, Ricketts analysis, Downsanalysis, Wylie analysis, Tweed analysis, McNamara analysis, Holdawayanalysis, Burstone analysis. The three-dimensional （3D） craniofacialmeasurements were performed through3D Camega scan system. The databaseof quantitative measurement of three-dimensional craniofacial tissue ofChinese adults with well-balance profiles was established. This database wasavailable for diagnosis and therapy of craniomaxillofacial deficiency. Also, thisdatabase was attributed to Virtual Reality Orthopedic Surgery System. To findout the dynamic smile characteristics of Chinese adults with well-balanceprofiles in3D optical scanning method, which were the essential data forclinical examination, diagnosis, perspective prognosis and assessment.Methods: Two categories of objects included in the research: populationwith well-balance profiles group from the normal popution with the idealocclusion and Angle Ⅱpopution group. And the standards of the normalpopution are as follows:①in near ideal occlusion standard, neutral molarrelationship, normal overbite， normal overbite;②well-balance andequilibrium profile;③symmetrical face and three parts of one thirdscoordinate;④no plastic surgery and no orthodontic and orthognathictreatment history;⑤the mouth opening at the normal range, no temporomandibular disorders;⑥in goodhealth and the teeth well-developed.The population with well-balance profiles group was selected after step1byevaluating the lateral profiles of the the normal popution with the idealocclusion. Chinese lay judges evaluated each of the sujects’ profiles after step1that were projected on the screen for30seconds. Each profile was evaluatedas very pleasant （5points）, pleasant （4points）, average （3points）, belowaverage （2points）, and unpleasant （1point）. The scores for each profile wererecorded and calculated. Subjects who were unanimously rated as pleasing （3or4points） by the judges were included as the sample. The standards of AngleⅡ popution are as follows:①in good health and no systemic disease;②bilateralmolar relationship with Class Ⅱ occlusion and facial skull typewith Class Ⅱ;③no plastic surgery and no orthodontic and orthognathictreatment history.Part1: The study was taken of5500subjects who were students at HebeiMedical University, the Shijiazhuang University of Economics. After step1,from5500students,50men and50women satisfied the selection criteria as theideal occlusion. After the procedure of selecting population with well-balanceprofiles, the sample included56profiles （25male,30female）.The study was taken of the patients in clinic. And30men and30womensatisfied the selection criteria as classⅡ occlusion.Lateral cephalometric radiographs were taken for the normal poputionand Angle Ⅱ popution. After the lateral cephalograms, soft-tissue outlineswere traced on0.003mm matte acetate papers and then scanned. A softwareprogram （Adobe Photoshop, CS5.0） was used to darken and trim the scannedprofiles to obtain black soft-tissue profiles on white backgrounds to trace andprocess these profiles, which extended from glabella to the cervical point forall subjects. This step is to select the population with well-balance profiles.All radiographs were traced and digitized by writer and reviewed threetimes every two weeks for accurate landmark identification. Each tracing wasretrieved and digitized on the computer using the Winceph CephalometricSoftware program. When all the analyses were done, the results were subjected to T testusing the SPSS program （Statistical Product and Service Solutions, USA）. Thelevel of significance was set at0.05. The correlational relationship incephalometric analyses was established by the SPSS program with stepwisemethod.Part2:3D Camega scanning were taken of subjects of the popution withwell-balance profiles. The3D craniofacial soft tissue images were reformattedand3D measurements were performed in Cloudform Software program. Allimages were traced and digitized by writer and reviewed three times every twoweeks for accurate landmark identification.When all the analyses were done, the results were subjected to T testusing the SPSS program （Statistical Product and Service Solutions, USA）. Thelevel of significance was set at0.05.Part3:3D Camega scanning were taken of subjects of the popution withwell-balance profiles and the Angle Ⅱ popution. The3D craniofacial softtissue smile images were reformatted and3D smile measurements wereperformed in Cloudform Software program. All images were traced anddigitized by writer and reviewed three times every two weeks for accuratelandmark identification.When all the analyses were done, the results were subjected to T test usingthe SPSS program （Statistical Product and Service Solutions, USA）. The levelof significance was set at0.05.Results：Part1:1Cephalometric analysis for Chinese adults with well-balance profiles bygenderThe male showed significantly smaller than the female in SE length（Steiner）. The male showed significantly larger than the female in the items asfollows: Lower lip-E.plane （Ricketts）; lower vertical height-depth ratio，upper-lip protrusion，lower-lip protrusion （Burstone）; Soft tissue subnasale toH line （Holdaway）; U1-SN（other）. 2Cephalometric analysis for classⅡ by genderThe male showed significantly larger than the female in the items asfollows: T4-S，Ptm-ANS，T4-Pog （Wylie）3Comparation of cephalometric analysis between Chinese adults withwell-balance profiles and patients with Class ⅡThe well-balance population showed significantly larger than the classⅡpopulation in the items as follows: U1to L1angle （Steiner）; Facial depth（Ricketts）; FMIA （Tweed）; Soft tissue facial angle， Nose prominence（Holdaway）; APDI （MEAW）.The well-balance population showed significantly smaller than the classⅡpopulation in the items as follows: ANB，U1to NA length，U1to NA angle，L1to NB length，L1to NB angle，SL length，SE length （Steiner）; Convexity，U1-APO disance，L1-APO disance，L1-APO degree，U6-PTV，Lowerlip-E.plane （Ricketts）; Mandibular prognathism, U1prognathism, L1prognathism，EXL，ENL，LAFH （McNamara）; Ptm-ANS, T4-S （Wylie）; angleof convexity （Downs）; IMPA （Tweed）; facial convexity angle，upper-lipprotrusion， lower-lip protrusion， vertical lip-chin ratio， interlabial gap（Burstone）; Soft tissue subnasale to H line，Lower lip to H line，Skeletalprofile convexity （Holdaway）; ODI （MEAW）.4Comparation of cephalometric analysis between Chinese adults and the otherethnic samplesThe Chinese showed significantly larger than Japanese in the items asfollows: SNB, SND, Pog to NB length,U1to L1angle （Steiner）; Facial depth，Mandibular A （Ricketts）; Y-axis （Downs）; FMA，IMPA （Tweed）; maxillaryprognathism，lower face-throat angle，lower vertical height-depth ratio，vertical lip-chin ratio，interlabial gap，maxillary incisor exposure （Burstone）;Soft tissue subnasale to H line，Lower lip to H line，H angle，Upper lip sulcusdepth，Soft tissue chin thickness （Holdaway）.The Chinese showed significantly smaller than Japanese in the items asfollows: ANB，L1to NB length，L1to NB angle，Occlusal pl. to SN angle，Go-Gn to SN angle，SE length （Steiner）; Mandibular P，L.F.H，Convexity， U6-PTV，Lower lip-E.plane （Ricketts）; angle of convexity （Downs）; FMIA（Tweed）; nasolabial angle， lower-lip protrusion （Burstone）; Upper lipthickness，Upper lip strain measurement （Holdaway）.The Chinese showed significantly larger than Whites in the items asfollows: U1to NA length，U1to NA angle，L1to NB length，L1to NB angle（Steiner）; Mandibular A.，L1-APO disance，L1-APO degree，U6-PTV，Lowerlip-E.plane （Ricketts）; Maxillary prognathism，Mandibular prognathism，L1prognathism （McNamara）; angle of convexity, Y-axis （Downs）; FMA，IMPA（Tweed）; mandibular prognathism，lower face-throat angle，lower verticalheight-depth ratio，upper-lip protrusion，lower-lip protrusion （Burstone）; Softtissue subnasale to H line，Lower lip to H line，H angle，Upper lip sulcusdepth，Soft tissue chin thickness （Holdaway）; APDI （MEAW）.The Chinese showed significantly smaller than Whites in the items asfollows: U1to L1angle，SL length，SE length （Steiner）; Facial axis，Facialdepth （Ricketts）; EXL，ENL，LAFH （McNamara）; T4-S，T4-Pog （Wylie）;FMIA （Tweed）; facial convexity angle，vertical height ratio，nasolabial angle（Burstone）; Soft tissue facial angle，Nose prominence，lower lip sulcus depth，Upper lip thickness，Upper lip strain measurement （Holdaway）.5The correlational analysis in Ricketts: Y（Lower lip-E.plane）=0.447X1（U1-APO disance）+0.324X₂（Convexity）-3.253；Y（U1-APO disance）=0.107X1（L1to NB length）+0.987X₂（U1to NA length）+0.610X₃（ANB）-0.445X4（Pog to NB length）-0.097X5（SND）-0.037X₆（U1to NA angle）+7.461；Y（Convexity）=0.386X1（NA-PA）+0.088X2（L1to NBangle）-0.106X3（U1to NA length）-1.241.6The correlational analysis in Burstone: Y （facial convexity angle）=-0.251X1（nasolabial angle）+1.122X₂（lower-lip protrusion）-19.604；Y（nasolabial angle）=105.919-1.301X（U1to NA length）；Y（lower-lipprotrusion）=0.545X₁（L1to NB length）+0.043X2（SNA）-2.645.7The correlational analysis in Holdaway: Y（H angle）=1.118X1（soft tissuesubnasale to H line）-0.576X₂（soft tissue chin thickness）+0.848X3（skeletalprofile convexity）+0.443X₄（upper lip strain measurement）+11.998；Y （Skeletal profile convexity）=0.179X₁（NA-PA）-0.264X₂（NP-FH）+25.016；Y（Soft tissue subnasale to H line）=0.301X （L1to NB length）+6.133；Y（Upper lip strain measurement）=0.158X1（U1to NA angle）+0.079X2（SNB）-9.388Part2:1The soft-tissue measurement of3D CaMega scan system for Chinese adultswell-balance profiles by genderThe male showed significantly larger than the female in the items asfollows: n-Sn，tr-n，g-me，ls-li，Sn-sto，tr-g，g-Sn，Sn-me （Height）; Ch-Ch，ft-ft，ex-ex，en-en，zy-zy，go-go，mz-mz （Width）; Sn-n-si （Angle）;pg-（go-go），pg-（t-t），n-（t-t），Sn-（t-t）（Distance）; g-me/v-me，g-me/zy-zy（Craniofacial index）; en-en， ex-ex， en-en/ex-ex, ex-Sn-ex, g-Sn/ex-ex,ex-ex/g-me （Eye）; n-Sn，n-prn，Sn-prn，al-al，Sn-E，prn-（ls-pg），al-al/zy-z,al-al/Ch-Ch, al-al/n-Sn, al-al/g-me （Nose）;t-t/v-me（Ear）; Ch-Ch，ls-li，Sn-sto，sto-si，Sn-ls，ls-n-li，ls-n-pg （Lip）; t-go，go-me，go-go （Mandible）; mz-mz，zy-zy （zygomatic）.The male showed significantly smaller than the female in the items asfollows: tr-me （Height）; left （n-Sn-mz）/right（n-Sn-mz）（Angle）; zy-zy/tr-me，go-go/g-me， ft-ft/tr-g， go-go/Sn-me （Craniofacial index）;（pg-si）-FH，（me-go）-FH （Profile）（Mandible）.2Comparison of the soft-tissue measurement between3D CaMega and CTsystem by genderThe CaMega showed significantly larger than CT for the male in the itemsas follows: tr-me，Sn-sto，g-Sn，Sn-me （Height）; Ch-Ch （Width）; Sn-me/g-me（Craniofacial index）; ex-Sn-ex，ex-ex/zy-zy （Eye）; Sn-prn，Sn-E，prn-（ls-pg）（Nose）; Ch-Ch，Sn-sto （Lip）.The CaMega showed significantly smaller than CT for the male in theitems as follows: eu-eu （Width）; go-go/zy-zy，zy-zy/g-Sn，go-go/Sn-me（Craniofacial index）; t-t （Ear）; go-go/zy-zy （Mandible）（zygomatic）.The CaMega showed significantly larger than CT for the female in theitems as follows: tr-n，g-me，tr-g，g-Sn，Sn-me （Height）;（n-pg）-FH，t-pg-t （Angle）; Sn-me/g-me （Craniofacial index）;（n-pg）-FH（Profile）; ex-Sn-ex，ex-ex/g-me （Eye）; Sn-E,prn-（ls-pg）,al-al/zy-zy （Nose）; t-t （Ear）; t-pg-t（Mandible）.The CaMega showed significantly smaller than CT for the female in theitems as follows: tr-me （Height）; eu-eu（Width）; g-n-prn （Angle）（Profile）;zy-zy/tr-me，go-go/g-me，go-go/zy-zy，zy-zy/g-Sn，go-go/Sn-me （Craniofacialindex）; g-n-prn, al-al/g-me （Nose）; go-go/zy-zy （Mandible）（zygomatic）.Part3:1Smile measurements in Chinese adults with well-balance profile by gender:the male showed significantly larger than the female in the items asfollows:al-al（rest）, al-al（smile）, Sn-Ust（rest）, Sn-Ust（smile）, Chl-Chr（rest）,pg-n （smile）-pg-n （rest）,Li-Lll（smile）.2Smile measurements in patients with class Ⅱ by gender:The male showed significantly larger than the female in the items asfollows: al-al（rest）, al-al（smile）, Sn-Ust（rest）, Sn-Ust（smile）, Chl-Chr（rest）Li-Lll（smile）; the male showed significantly smaller than the female in（Chl-Ust）+（Chl-Lst）/（Chr-Ust）+（Chr-Lst）.3Comparation of smile measurement between Chinese adults withwell-balance profiles and patients with Class Ⅱ:The well-balance population showed significantly larger than the classⅡpopulation for the male in the items as follows: al-al（rest）, al-al（smile）,（Chl-Ust）+（Chl-Lst）/（Chr-Ust）+（Chr-Lst）.The well-balance population showed significantly smaller than the classⅡpopulation for the male in the items as follows: Sn-Ust （smile）-Sn-Ust （rest）,Cp-（L1-R1）, Li-Ull（smile）, Cp-（L1-R1）/Lst-（Llab-Rlab）.The well-balance population showed significantly larger than the classⅡpopulation for the female in the items as follows: al-al（rest）,al-al（smile）.The well-balance population showed significantly smaller than the classⅡpopulation for the female in the items as follows: Chl-Chr（rest）, Cp-（L1-R1）,Ulgm-Ull（smile）.Conclusions: 1Cephalometric norms in Chinese adults with well-balance profile of hannationality were estab-lished. Evaluate the esthetic characteristics ofsoft-tissue profile in Chinese adults with well-balance face. Find out thecorrelational relationship in cephalometric cephalometric measurments andregression relationship of between the relevant hard and soft tissue.23D craniofacial norms in Chinese adults with well-balance profile of hannationality were established. Find out the esthetic characteristics of soft-tissueprofile in Chinese adults with well-balance face with modern view.33D smile indexes in Chinese adults with well-balance profile of hannationality were estab-lished. Find out the esthetic characteristics of dynamicsmile in Chinese adults with well-balance face with modern view.更多还原