Objective:

To determine whether facial asymmetry existed in patients with developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH).

Materials and Methods:

Subjects consisted of children between ages 5 and 10 years having DDH, and treated by the Von Rosen splint method. Three-dimensional (3-D) facial photographs were taken on all subjects using the 3dMDface system. Using RF6 PP2 software, anthropometric landmarks were plotted and used to calculate asymmetry based on 3-D coordinates in a reference framework.

Results:

Of a total of 60 subjects with a mean age of 8 years (SD, 1.4 years), 30 had dysplasia of the left hip; 13, of the right; and 17 were bilateral. Twenty-seven subjects had upper face (UF) dominance values of 2 mm or more; of those, 26 were right-side dominant. Twenty-four subjects (40%) had a chin-point (CP) deviation of 2 mm or more; of those, 21 had right-side deviations. Statistically, UF and CP deviations were not significantly independent of each other (P > .05). Thirty percent of subjects had a posterior dental crossbite.

Conclusions:

The results indicate that facial asymmetry exists in patients with DDH.

Developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH), the etiology of which is multifactorial, is medically well known and usually diagnosed in infancy.1 In the literature, there is very little regarding facial asymmetries in DDH children. It might seem reasonable to expect that craniofacial asymmetries would translate into concomitant dental asymmetries, and studies do exist showing statistically significant associations between facial and dental asymmetry,2 suggesting an increased need for orthodontic therapy. Because some of these problems may require orthopedic correction during the growth period or surgical management later,3 additional information on the development and detection of facial asymmetry is important in orthodontic treatment planning.

Measurement of facial asymmetry using three-dimensional (3-D) photography is a relatively new concept, with just a few studies exploring its capabilities46 and no standard technique having yet been accepted. Past methods of study have included various 2-D photographs and radiographs. These records have proven useful but they are limited because of their 2-D representation of a 3-D structure. Three-dimensional photography seems to solve many of these dilemmas, as it is noninvasive and does not expose subjects to radiation. This technology allows accurate representation of facial soft tissue and morphologies,79 and it can be used to compare10,11 and predict orthodontic outcomes.1214 

This study was designed to determine whether facial asymmetry exists in patients with DDH and to evaluate a method for the study of facial asymmetries and malocclusions in children born with DDH and treated with splint therapy.

Subjects

The subjects recruited for this study had to meet the following inclusion criteria:

  • Subjects were born during the years 1997–2001 in Northern Ostrobothnia.

  • Hospital District of Oulu, Finland.

  • Subjects had DDH.

  • Subjects were treated by the Von Rosen method.

All children with previously diagnosed plagiocephaly or craniosynostosis were excluded from the study.

Imaging System

The imaging system used in this study was the portable 3dMDface System (3dMD, Atlanta, GA), an imaging system that combines stereophotogrammetry and structured light techniques.12 This system uses a multicamera configuration, with three cameras on each side (one color and two infrared), that records high-quality, photo-realistic pictures. It is able to capture full facial images from ear to ear and under the chin in 1.5 milliseconds at the highest resolution. Manufacturer's stated accuracy is less than 0.5 mm, and the quoted clinical accuracy is 1.5% of total observed variance.15 Three-dimensional surface images captured by surface acquisition systems are highly repeatable and precise.16,17 

Images taken with the 3dMDface System were analyzed and viewed on a computer using the 3dMDpatient Software Platform.

Image Acquisition

Images were acquired with the subjects in their natural head position, which has proven to be clinically reliable.18 The subjects sat on an adjustable chair with their face centered on a computer screen and were asked to keep the facial musculature as relaxed as possible.

Image Analysis

All images acquired were transferred to a reverse modeling software package, Rapidform 2006 Plus Pack 2 (RF6 PP2) (INUS Technology, Seoul, Korea) for analysis.19 The software allows the surface data to be assessed as a collection of points interrelated by their positions along an x-, y-, and z-coordinate system. The 3-D evaluation methods described below were patterned after a recent study using the same software.4 

3-D Evaluation Methods

Each craniofacial image was oriented in the computer virtual space to have a natural head position before analysis. This was done by confirming the orientation of the interpupillary line to be parallel to the horizontal x-axis (from both a frontal and coronal view) and the orientation of the patient's line of sight parallel to horizontal (z-axis). Various anthropometric landmarks were chosen for analysis and were identified by marking them on the surface of the facial contour using the cursor. Anthropometric landmarks included five midline points (n, prn, sn, ls, pg) and four bilateral points (ex, en, ac, cph) (Figure 1 and Table 1).

Figure 1

A sample illustrating the anthropometric landmarks used.

Figure 1

A sample illustrating the anthropometric landmarks used.

Close modal
Figure 2

Illustration of the x-, y-, and z-coordinate system centered at landmark nasion. (z-axis is oriented perpendicular to the page).

Figure 2

Illustration of the x-, y-, and z-coordinate system centered at landmark nasion. (z-axis is oriented perpendicular to the page).

Close modal
Table 1

Definitions of Anthropometric Landmarks Used in This Study

Definitions of Anthropometric Landmarks Used in This Study
Definitions of Anthropometric Landmarks Used in This Study

Landmarks were chosen carefully so as to be easily identifiable and repeatable, and they appear as color points with reference coordinates. The surface shell was translated in the 3-D space so as to center soft tissue nasion (n) as point (0, 0, 0) in the x-, y-, z-coordinate system, Figure 2. The values of other points' coordinates therefore represent distances from n on the chosen axis in millimeters; their corresponding positive or negative value indicates directions (ie, positive x  =  left, positive y  =  up, positive z  =  anterior).

Parameters Measured

The following three parameters were studied and evaluated:

UF dominance analysis

  • All anthropometric landmarks except pg were considered in the upper two-thirds of the face (above the mandibular region) and were used to calculate the side of dominance of the upper face (UF). For these points, the more lateral (x-axis) the landmark, the more dominant is the landmark to that side of the face.

  • For midline landmarks (prn, sn, ls), x-values were recorded, representing their deviation from the facial midline. By conventions set out in this study, a negative value for x represents a deviation toward the right side of the face. Theoretically, a perfectly symmetrical face would have an x-value of 0 for every midline point.

  • For bilateral landmarks (ex, en, ac, cph), differences in the left and right x-values represent their degree of asymmetry in that plane of space. Theoretically, bilateral landmarks on a perfectly symmetrical face should have equal but opposite values for the x-coordinate (eg, right  =  −5 mm; left  =  +5 mm). Differences in corresponding x-values for bilateral landmarks were recorded. Negative values were assigned to all right-side dominant measures, and positive values for all left-side dominant measures.

  • Finally, UF dominance was computed using these raw x-values for midline landmarks and differences in x-values for bilateral landmarks with the appropriate negative or positive sign assigned to correlate with the side of dominance. For each subject, x-values were summated and averaged to formulate a negative or positive value to represent a right or left dominance in the UF.

CP Deviation analysis

Chin deviation can be one of the most notable indicators of facial asymmetry, as laterality is most common on the lower one-third of the face.20,21 CP deviation was measured by the x-value of landmark pg, which represents the deviation from the facial midline in millimeters. This was recorded for each subject, and a positive value represents a left deviation while a negative value represents a right deviation. Based on previous literature, a distance of less than 2 mm was considered to be within normal facial proportions of symmetry and therefore not significant.2123 

Dental occlusion analysis

Subjects underwent a clinical dental exam, which recorded the presence of posterior cross bites (left, right, or bilateral).

Paired t-tests (SPSS 17.0, Chicago, Ill) were used to determine whether significant differences existed between UF and CP deviations in the x-direction of space by comparing UF and CP values in all subjects with

  1. Pair 1: significant UF dominance values.

  2. Pair 2: significant CP deviation values.

Subjects

A total of 60 out of 130 subjects voluntarily participated in the study. All were children between ages 5 and 10 years, and the average age of all subjects was 8 years (see Table 2 for breakdown). Ten measurements were randomly made on five subjects by two investigators to test inter- and intraobserver reliability. A t-test showed no statistically significant differences between operators.

Table 2

Results of the Side of DDH of Subjects Participating in the Study

Results of the Side of DDH of Subjects Participating in the Study
Results of the Side of DDH of Subjects Participating in the Study

Parameters Measured

UF dominance analysis

Using the average value from all UF landmarks, 27 subjects (45%) had a significant (2 mm or more) UF asymmetry in the x-dimension. Of these, 26 were right-side dominant and only 1 was left-side dominant (Table 3). Looking at the sample as a whole, the average UF dominance value was −1.5 mm, with a range from −4.6 mm to 9.7 mm. Without regard to right or left, by taking the absolute value of each number, the average asymmetry value for the UF was 1.8 mm.

Table 3

Results of the Three Parameters Measured

Results of the Three Parameters Measured
Results of the Three Parameters Measured

CP deviation analysis

Regarding lower face asymmetry, 24 subjects (40%) had a CP deviation of 2 mm or more. Within this group, 21 had right-side chin deviations (87.5%) and 3 had left-side chin deviations (12.5%; Table 3). In all 60 subjects, the average chin deviation was −1.1 mm, ranging from −5.1 mm to 7.6 mm. Without regard to right or left, by taking the absolute value of each number, the average deviation of pg from the facial midline was 1.9 mm.

Dental occlusion analysis

Posterior dental cross bites were present in 18 of the 60 subjects (30%), with 7 being right, 5 left, and 6 bilateral (Table 3).

Table 4

Results of Paired t-Test for Different Groupingsa

Results of Paired t-Test for Different Groupingsa
Results of Paired t-Test for Different Groupingsa

Statistical Analysis

Statistical analysis to determine whether significant differences existed between UF and CP deviations in the x-direction of space indicated that there were no statistically significant differences for UF vs CP (pair 1) and CP vs UF (pair 2) (P > .05). The results suggest that subjects in this study with a presenting asymmetry in either the UF or CP tended to be asymmetric on the same side in the corresponding parameter (Table 4).

Until now, few studies have focused on analyzing facial asymmetries and malocclusions specifically within a population of DDH children. Vlimmeren,24 in his review of diagnostic strategies for the evaluation of asymmetry in infants, stated that children with deformational plagiocephaly have an elevated risk of mandibular asymmetry, and cranial asymmetry was found in about 30% of infants with muscular torticollis. Studies exist showing statistically significant associations between facial and dental asymmetry.2 Pirttiniemi et al.22 found significant asymmetries of the facial skeleton and dental arches with muscular torticollis. The patients had a high prevalence of treated or diagnosed lateral malocclusions (50%) compared with the control group (12.5%), and they also had more dental arch asymmetry and midline deviation in the maxillary than in the mandibular arch.

In addition, a few reports in the literature link DDH to these asymmetric head and neck disorders. Watson studied the relation between the side of plagiocephaly, dislocation of hip, scoliosis, bat ears, and sternomastoid tumor.25 Iwahara and Ikeda26 reported that 14.8% of their patients with congenital muscular torticollis also had dysplasia of the hip, whereas Hummer and MacEwen observed 20%.27 Cady1 reiterated that the risk factors generally used for DDH are questionable physical exam, female sex, breech presentation, and positive family history, and added that there is some evidence that torticollis may be a risk factor as well.

Some studies even relate the side of the disorder (left or right) to the side of craniofacial asymmetry. For example, infants with posterior deformational plagiocephaly are characterized by having the ipsilateral ear and cheek anteriorly displaced, and mandibular asymmetry with deviation toward the unaffected side.28,29 Kane et al.,30 in a computer tomography study, reported a 3.8% larger hemimandibular volume, a 3.5% shorter ramal height, and a 3% longer mandibular body length on the ipsilateral side of the occipital flattening. Watson25 related this to DDH, reporting that the flat temple in plagiocephaly and a unilateral congenitally dislocated hip tend to be on the same side.

The image analysis and 3-D evaluation methods used in this study mimicked techniques from a recently published report studying asymmetry using the RF6 software.4 In addition, the use of anthropometric landmarks with the 3dMDface System have been proven valid and reliable.31 

In our study, a careful inspection of the data found no strong relationship between the side of DDH compared with the side of UF dominance, the side of CP deviation, or the side of dental cross bite. Surprisingly, there was also no strong relationship between CP deviation and the presence of a posterior cross bite. Only 5 of the 24 significant CP deviations had concomitant posterior cross bites, which might influence the asymmetric mandibular position.

In this study, 45% of the study sample had significant (2+ mm) UF asymmetry; of those, 26 of 27 were right-side dominant. Additionally, 40% of the study sample had significant (2+ mm) CP deviations; of those, 21 of 24 were right-side deviations. Looking at the sample as a whole, both the average UF dominance (−1.5 mm) and the average CP deviation (−1.1 mm) were negative numbers. This reflects a majority of right-side facial tendencies in the study sample. The results also suggest that subjects in this study did not have upper or lower facial asymmetry independent from the other, as a presenting asymmetry in either the UF or CP tended to be asymmetric on the same side in the corresponding parameter.

According to a criterion used in previous studies, lateral deviation of 2 mm or more was employed as a critical value to separate asymmetry from symmetry.31 Severt and Proffit21 reported that, in patients showing dentofacial deformity including jaw deviation, laterality toward the left side was present in more than 85% of their sample. Our study of DDH children, however, showed quite the opposite, with 87.5% of the significant CP deviations being toward the right side. Perhaps this suggests something different occurring with subjects having DDH as compared with the general population.

Another interesting finding was the number of subjects with cross bites—30%. Two studies in 1990 and 200432,33 reported the incidence of cross bites in Finnish children to be 13% and 4%–10%, respectively. This information suggests a much higher prevalence of this malocclusion than that in the general population.

  • The results indicate that facial asymmetry exists in patients with DDH.

1
Cady
,
R. B.
Developmental dysplasia of the hip: definition, recognition, and prevention of late sequelae.
Pediatr Ann
2006
.
35
:
92
101
.
2
Sheats
,
R. D.
,
S. P.
McGorray
,
Q.
Musmar
,
T. T.
Wheeler
, and
G. J.
King
.
Prevalence of orthodontic asymmetries.
Semin Orthod
1998
.
4
:
138
145
.
3
Bishara
,
S. E.
,
P. S.
Burkey
, and
J. G.
Kharouf
.
Dental and facial asymmetries: a review.
Angle Orthod
1994
.
64
:
89
98
.
4
Bozic
,
M. K. C.
,
S.
Richmond
,
O.
Maja
, and
N. I.
Hren
.
A novel method of analysis of Class III patients using 3-dimensional soft tissue analysis: Elsevier Editorial System(tm) for Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. In press. 2008.).
5
Ferrario
,
V. F.
,
C.
Sforza
,
A.
Miani
Jr
, and
G.
Serrao
.
A three-dimensional evaluation of human facial asymmetry.
J Anat
1995
.
186
(
pt 1
):
103
110
.
6
Hartmann
,
J.
,
P.
Meyer-Marcotty
,
M.
Benz
,
G.
Hausler
, and
A.
Stellzig-Eisenhauer
.
Reliability of a method for computing facial symmetry plane and degree of asymmetry based on 3D–data.
J Orofac Orthop
2007
.
68
:
477
490
.
7
Kau
,
C. H.
,
A. J.
Cronin
, and
S.
Richmond
.
A three–dimensional evaluation of postoperative swelling following orthognathic surgery at 6 months.
Plast Reconstr Surg
2007
.
119
:
2192
2199
.
8
McCance
,
A. M.
,
J. P.
Moss
,
W. R.
Wright
,
A. D.
Linney
, and
D. R.
James
.
A three-dimensional soft tissue analysis of 16 skeletal Class III patients following bimaxillary surgery.
Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg
1992
.
30
:
221
232
.
9
Moss
,
J. P.
,
S. F.
Ismail
, and
R. J.
Hennessy
.
Three-dimensional assessment of treatment outcomes on the face.
Orthod Craniofac Res
2003
.
6
(
suppl 1
):
126
131
.
discussion 79–82.
10
Hajeer
,
M. Y.
,
A. F.
Ayoub
, and
D. T.
Millett
.
Three-dimensional assessment of facial soft-tissue asymmetry before and after orthognathic surgery.
Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg
2004
.
42
:
396
404
.
11
Palomo
,
J. M.
,
D. W.
Hunt
Jr
,
M. G.
Hans
, and
B. H.
Broadbent
Jr
.
A longitudinal 3-dimensional size and shape comparison of untreated Class I and Class II subjects.
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop
2005
.
127
:
584
591
.
12
Kau
,
C. H.
,
S.
Richmond
,
A.
Incrapera
,
J.
English
, and
J. J.
Xia
.
Three-dimensional surface acquisition systems for the study of facial morphology and their application to maxillofacial surgery.
Int J Med Robot
2007
.
3
:
97
110
.
13
Mah
,
J.
and
A. K.
Ritto
.
Imaging in orthodontics: present and future.
J Clin Orthod
2002 Nov
.
36
:
619
625
.
14
Marmulla
,
R.
,
S.
Hassfeld
,
T.
Luth
, and
J.
Muhling
.
Laser-scan-based navigation in cranio-maxillofacial surgery.
J Craniomaxillofac Surg
2003
.
31
:
267
277
.
15
Aldridge
,
K.
,
S. A.
Boyadjiev
,
G. T.
Capone
,
V. B.
DeLeon
, and
J. T.
Richtsmeier
.
Precision and error of three–dimensional phenotypic measures acquired from 3dMD photogrammetric images.
Am J Med Genet A
2005
.
15;138A
:
247
253
.
16
Kau
,
C. H.
,
A.
Zhurov
,
S.
Richmond
,
A.
Cronin
,
C.
Savio
, and
C.
Mallorie
.
Facial templates: a new perspective in three dimensions.
Orthod Craniofac Res
2006
.
9
:
10
17
.
17
Kau
,
C. H.
,
L. M.
Hunter
, and
E. J.
Hingston
.
A different look: 3-dimensional facial imaging of a child with Binder syndrome.
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop
2007
.
132
:
704
709
.
18
Chiu
,
C. S.
and
R. K.
Clark
.
Reproducibility of natural head position.
J Dent
1991
.
19
:
130
131
.
19
Zhurov AI
,
K,C. H.
and
S.
Richmond
.
Computer Methods for Measuring 3D Facial Morphology.
In
Middleton MGSaMLJ
,
J.
Computer Methods in Biomechanics & Biomedical Engineering–5. FIRST Numerics Ltd, Cardiff, UK.
20
Samman
,
N.
,
A. C.
Tong
,
D. L.
Cheung
, and
H.
Tideman
.
Analysis of 300 dentofacial deformities in Hong Kong.
Int J Adult Orthod Orthog Surg
1992
.
7
:
181
185
.
21
Severt
,
T. R.
and
W. R.
Proffit
.
The prevalence of facial asymmetry in the dentofacial deformities population at the University of North Carolina.
Int J Adult Orthod Orthog Surg
1997
.
12
:
171
176
.
22
Pirttiniemi
,
P.
Normal and increased functional asymmetries in the craniofacial area.
Acta Odontol Scand
1998
.
56
:
342
345
.
23
Haraguchi
,
S.
,
K.
Takada
, and
Y.
Yasuda
.
Facial asymmetry in subjects with skeletal Class III deformity.
Angle Orthod
2002
.
72
:
28
35
.
24
van Vlimmeren
,
L. A.
,
P. J.
Helders
,
L. N.
van Adrichem
, and
R. H.
Engelbert
.
Diagnostic strategies for the evaluation of asymmetry in infancy—a review.
Eur J Pediatr
2004
.
163
:
185
191
.
25
Watson
,
G. H.
Relation between side of plagiocephaly, dislocation of hip, scoliosis, bat ears, and sternomastoid tumours.
Arch Dis Child
1971
.
46
:
203
210
.
26
Iwahara
,
T.
and
S.
Ikeda
.
On the ipsilateral involvement of congenital muscular torticollis and congenital dislocation of the hip.
J Jpn Orthop Assn
1962
.
35
:
1221
.
27
Hummer
,
C. D.
and
G. D.
MacEwen
.
The coexistence of torticollis and congenital dysplasia of the hip.
J Bone Joint Surg Am
1972
.
54
:
1255
1256
.
28
Huang
,
M. H.
,
J. S.
Gruss
,
S. K.
Clarren
,
W. E.
Mouradian
,
M. L.
Cunningham
,
T. S.
Roberts
, et al
.
The differential diagnosis of posterior plagiocephaly: true lambdoid synostosis versus positional molding.
Plast Reconstr Surg
1996
.
98
:
765
774; discussion 75–76
.
29
Mulliken
,
J. B.
,
D. L.
Vander Woude
,
M.
Hansen
,
R. A.
LaBrie
, and
R. M.
Scott
.
Analysis of posterior plagiocephaly: deformational versus synostotic.
Plast Reconstr Surg
1999
.
103
:
371
380
.
30
Kane
,
A. A.
,
L. E.
Mitchell
,
K. P.
Craven
, and
J. L.
Marsh
.
Observations on a recent increase in plagiocephaly without synostosis.
Pediatrics
1996
.
97
(
6; Pt 1
):
877
885
.
31
Wong
,
J. Y.
,
A. K.
Oh
,
E.
Ohta
,
A. T.
Hunt
,
G. F.
Rogers
,
J. B.
Mulliken
, et al
.
Validity and reliability of craniofacial anthropometric measurement of 3D digital photogrammetric images.
Cleft Palate Craniofac J
2008
.
232
299
.
32
Mugonzibwa
,
E. A.
,
R.
Eskeli
,
A. M.
Kuijpers-Jagtman
,
M. T.
Laine-Alava
, and
M. A.
van't Hof
.
Occlusal characteristics during different emergence stages of the permanent dentition in Tanzanian Bantu and Finnish children.
Eur J Orthod
2004
.
251
260
.
33
Kerosuo
,
H.
Occlusion in the primary and early mixed dentitions in a group of Tanzanian and Finnish children.
ASDC J Dent Child
1990
.
57
:
293
298
.