jawsurgeryforums.com

General Category => Functional Surgery Questions => Topic started by: secondtimearound on December 29, 2017, 02:03:09 PM

Title: Do people who favor the "Anteface" look aim for an abnormally high SNA/SNB?
Post by: secondtimearound on December 29, 2017, 02:03:09 PM
One thing I've never understood on jaw surgery and cosmetic surgery sites is how many people seem to want an "anteface".

Good examples of surgery with the outcome of what I mean are as follows (the male had CCW and advancement for sleep apnea):

(http://i.imgur.com/z9WmNGt.jpg)

(http://www11.pic-upload.de/21.08.15/f7shb5l5eo9r.png)

Naturally, many boxers and fighters have these types of facial structure to begin with:

(https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/OFzGpKgZ-u1FXLM8yhCFUY1CBsE=/34x0:941x605/1200x800/filters:focal(34x0:941x605)/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/45805730/ufcworldtour16.0.0.jpg)

(http://img.bleacherreport.net/img/images/photos/003/631/415/hi-res-961ff65f2e7eb955cc2a3c05e943e57c_crop_north.jpg?h=533&w=800&q=70&crop_x=center&crop_y=top)

In some ways, it does look great. Both the surgical examples at the top definitely look better after than before. It creates a very strong and long jaw line. It looks "powerful" even if slightly ape-like at times. Arnett and Gunson I've heard often aim for this aesthetic.

But is this really ideal? I wonder, what would the SNA/SNB angles look like on the examples above? I'm guessing above the normal, since I have nowhere near this level of jaw projection and mine are already above average.

For contrast, here is the profile of Jude Law, who has what I would guess would be as cephalometrically perfect a face as exists naturally:

(http://iv1.lisimg.com/image/415412/528full-jude-law.jpg)

He is neither recessed nor overly projected. He just looks harmonious to me.

What are your opinions on this phenomenon and goal of an "ante-face"? I even see people who have perfect jaws talking about trying to get both jaws advanced to try to create this appearance, and I am not sure about it at all.

Thoughts?
Title: Re: Do people who favor the "Anteface" look aim for an abnormally high SNA/SNB?
Post by: kavan on December 29, 2017, 05:40:52 PM
The first photo of woman is Sailer's and I think the second one of the guy is too. Word has it that he PHOTO SHOPS his cases (or someone does that FOR him) and he's insanely overpriced. GJ, the owner here is not too fond of Sailer being showcased here. Just to let you know.

Also, too ante face as you say the boxers, just looks too pugnacious and if gone too far can give a Neanderthal (or is that cro-magnon) gestalt.
Title: Re: Do people who favor the "Anteface" look aim for an abnormally high SNA/SNB?
Post by: PloskoPlus on December 29, 2017, 08:40:22 PM
Surgeons like to play shenanigans with photos - patients look down pre-op, look up post-op.
Title: Re: Do people who favor the "Anteface" look aim for an abnormally high SNA/SNB?
Post by: Lestat on December 30, 2017, 05:23:30 AM
An Anteface is the second best "facial type" after the Hyperanteface! I know that Marlene Dietrich had a Hyperanteface! Does anyone know more examples?
Title: Re: Do people who favor the "Anteface" look aim for an abnormally high SNA/SNB?
Post by: Lefortitude on December 30, 2017, 02:50:51 PM
Sailers results are 100% photoshopped (first two examples).  id say he WAY over does it, but thats the kind of clientel he serves: those who want outrageously dramatic changes.

The negroid (technical term, not a racist) skull naturally has a more forward set jaw, yet is usually offset by a less sloping forehead and less glabella bossing. I should be careful with my words here, as to not offend, but having high SNA/SNB angles without proportionally forward set midface features (zygomatic complex, inferior orbital rims, nasal spine etc) results in the more baboonish look.  and as you can see on brock lesnar, the superior orbital ridge, or "glabella bossing" is also a sexually dimorphic feature indicating high testosterone and a large frontal sinus.  This evolutionally appeared in primates as an advantage in breathing (bigger sinuses, bigger airways, better survival, more resistent to breathing congestion, host of other things but il skip the bio and just say its advantageous).
 
I would argue that the beautiful ante face we see in people like Marlene Dietrich or Angelina Jolie are not simply a result of forward set jaw, but an entirely forward grown middle third and lower third.  Trying to achieve ante face on someone with recessed orbitals and zygomas requires alloplastic augmentation, or high level osteotomies (LF3) in combination with orthognathic surgery.  It is the holy grail of beauty imo.
Title: Re: Do people who favor the "Anteface" look aim for an abnormally high SNA/SNB?
Post by: PloskoPlus on December 30, 2017, 04:12:15 PM
Photos taken from below exaggerate it IMO. The key is balance.
Title: Re: Do people who favor the "Anteface" look aim for an abnormally high SNA/SNB?
Post by: kavan on December 30, 2017, 04:21:15 PM
Sailers results are 100% photoshopped (first two examples).  id say he WAY over does it, but thats the kind of clientel he serves: those who want outrageously dramatic changes.

The negroid (technical term, not a racist) skull naturally has a more forward set jaw, yet is usually offset by a less sloping forehead and less glabella bossing. I should be careful with my words here, as to not offend, but having high SNA/SNB angles without proportionally forward set midface features (zygomatic complex, inferior orbital rims, nasal spine etc) results in the more baboonish look.  and as you can see on brock lesnar, the superior orbital ridge, or "glabella bossing" is also a sexually dimorphic feature indicating high testosterone and a large frontal sinus.  This evolutionally appeared in primates as an advantage in breathing (bigger sinuses, bigger airways, better survival, more resistent to breathing congestion, host of other things but il skip the bio and just say its advantageous).
 
I would argue that the beautiful ante face we see in people like Marlene Dietrich or Angelina Jolie are not simply a result of forward set jaw, but an entirely forward grown middle third and lower third.  Trying to achieve ante face on someone with recessed orbitals and zygomas requires alloplastic augmentation, or high level osteotomies (LF3) in combination with orthognathic surgery.  It is the holy grail of beauty imo.

Baboons have an acute 'Camper's angle'.
Title: Re: Do people who favor the "Anteface" look aim for an abnormally high SNA/SNB?
Post by: kavan on December 30, 2017, 05:44:07 PM
S, N, A, and B are landmark points seen on a ceph. So connecting S-N line to the A point makes the SNA angle. Connecting S-N line with the B point makes the SNB angle.   SNA-SNB=  ANB angle.
Title: Re: Do people who favor the "Anteface" look aim for an abnormally high SNA/SNB?
Post by: Lestat on December 31, 2017, 05:04:16 AM
I have an ante face now and had bimax retrognathia preop. I don't like it and im considering revision. I would have liked an orthognatic profile instead of an ante face. My nose and cheekbones were buried by the huge jaw advancement, and I feel my occlusal plane is completely horizontal. I did not know I was going to get an ante face. I had a transformation similar to the ones the Sailer's patients had and I am so depressed about my face having changed so much.

You're confusing something! Having an anteface means that the midface and zygoma also need to have good forward growth, not just the jaws. Anteface = forward grown face and not only forward grown jaws.

Instead of a revision I would try to build up the cheekbones a little, or push the midface forward. Your jaws are not to blame that you are dissatisfied with your appearance, because they correspond to the prevailing ideal of beauty.

Why did'nt you consider High Lefort I instead of a normal Lefort 1?
Title: Re: Do people who favor the "Anteface" look aim for an abnormally high SNA/SNB?
Post by: secondtimearound on December 31, 2017, 06:07:17 AM
You're confusing something! Having an anteface means that the midface and zygoma also need to have good forward growth, not just the jaws. Anteface = forward grown face and not only forward grown jaws.

Instead of a revision I would try to build up the cheekbones a little, or push the midface forward. Your jaws are not to blame that you are dissatisfied with your appearance, because they correspond to the prevailing ideal of beauty.

Why did'nt you consider High Lefort I instead of a normal Lefort 1?

This is the problem. According to WHO is this the "prevailing ideal of beauty"?

Does Jude Law have an anteface? Tom Cruise? Nick Bateman? Chico Lachowski?

This is one of the top male models in the world:

(https://www.polyvore.com/cgi/img-thing?.out=jpg&size=l&tid=36613001)

This is Michaelangelo's David:

(http://vlsi.colorado.edu/~rbloem/photos/David_right_profile.gif)

This man has made more money off his face in Hollywood than almost anyone on the planet:

(http://www.the-movie-times.net/pictdir4/actors/gallery/tomcruise/tomcruise172.jpg)

This is one of the most followed men on Instagram:

(https://i.imgur.com/b4Jg5p1.png)

Loads of top male and female models and actors don't have a babboonish advanced lower third and are considered beautiful.

It is conventional science that averaged faces are most attractive. That is what cephalometrics are based on - averaging faces. Therefore should a cephalometrically correct face not be most beautiful for that person's potential?

Are we now going to say intentionally creating abnornalities like an abnormally high SNA and SNB is "ideal"? Based on what science or evidence?

The only people I have seen claiming the "anteface" is the "ideal" are "memologists" on the Internet (most of whom have never had and will never have jaw surgery) and guys like Mike Mew. As far as I know there is no science to back the idea that this should be considered a standard for beauty as true.

Mazilla you should get some cephs done and get an analysis from cephx.com. Let us know what your SNA and SNB angles are as these are the easiest ways to judge the jaw positions. If they are normal or close enough you don't need revision - you need cheekbone and infraorbital implants likely as suggested.

If the angles are too high though your surgeon may have done you a disservice.
Title: Re: Do people who favor the "Anteface" look aim for an abnormally high SNA/SNB?
Post by: Lefortitude on December 31, 2017, 09:40:57 AM
This is the problem. According to WHO is this the "prevailing ideal of beauty"?

Does Jude Law have an anteface? Tom Cruise? Nick Bateman? Chico Lachowski?

This is one of the top male models in the world:

(https://www.polyvore.com/cgi/img-thing?.out=jpg&size=l&tid=36613001)

This is Michaelangelo's David:

(http://vlsi.colorado.edu/~rbloem/photos/David_right_profile.gif)

This man has made more money off his face in Hollywood than almost anyone on the planet:

(http://www.the-movie-times.net/pictdir4/actors/gallery/tomcruise/tomcruise172.jpg)

This is one of the most followed men on Instagram:

(https://i.imgur.com/b4Jg5p1.png)

Loads of top male and female models and actors don't have a babboonish advanced lower third and are considered beautiful.

It is conventional science that averaged faces are most attractive. That is what cephalometrics are based on - averaging faces. Therefore should a cephalometrically correct face not be most beautiful for that person's potential?

Are we now going to say intentionally creating abnornalities like an abnormally high SNA and SNB is "ideal"? Based on what science or evidence?

The only people I have seen claiming the "anteface" is the "ideal" are "memologists" on the Internet (most of whom have never had and will never have jaw surgery) and guys like Mike Mew. As far as I know there is no science to back the idea that this should be considered a standard for beauty as true.

Mazilla you should get some cephs done and get an analysis from cephx.com. Let us know what your SNA and SNB angles are as these are the easiest ways to judge the jaw positions. If they are normal or close enough you don't need revision - you need cheekbone and infraorbital implants likely as suggested.

If the angles are too high though your surgeon may have done you a disservice.

I like this post because it takes into account human perception and dosnt just leave it to the numbers.  I am technically severely retrognathic but not visibly repulsive (i dont think).  If you look at people with abnormally high SNA/SNB angles they are extremely good looking or extremely not.  in my opinion even going for a "straight" profile look is aggressive, and going past the cranial base (nasion) is ill advised except for rare circumstances in cases with strong orbital ridges and prominent zygomatic complexes.
Title: Re: Do people who favor the "Anteface" look aim for an abnormally high SNA/SNB?
Post by: secondtimearound on December 31, 2017, 10:54:49 AM
Ok that was quick, I got my analysis.

SNA: 81.03
SNB: 81,97
ANB: -0,94

I dont understand the numbers

You need to give us the normal ranges for that analysis. It will be next to the measurement for you. It will be given as a "mean" value with a SD (standard deviation).

Can you give us that info? Ie. Your value, mean, and SD?

I'm curious. Also with your values, can you find the "Wits" analysis and post the value for that with the mean and SD?

If your SNA/B reference normal mean and SD data is the same as mine (I'm not sure if this is gender specific or what gender you are), your jaws are pretty perfectly aligned and I don't think your surgeon brought them too far forward at all. Your upper is 1 degree behind ideal. Your lower jaw is maybe 2 degrees ahead of the average (one SD, ie. farther forward than 68% of people) which is still well within normal parameters.

If you're male the strong lower jaw is likely a good thing. If you're a female maybe it creates a too strong lower jaw effect. Otherwise unless there's something else about your face that's causing a problem, I can't see an issue. I think you'd have a hard time convincing anyone to redo your bsso over a few mm, especially if your bite now works. These are generally good values.

Feel free to PM me links to your face photos if you want an opinion. I won't share obviously with anyone. Maybe you just need time to get used to your new face.
Title: Re: Do people who favor the "Anteface" look aim for an abnormally high SNA/SNB?
Post by: secondtimearound on December 31, 2017, 11:22:15 AM
For reference, here is a diagram which shows most of the major landmarks. You can see how SNA and SNB describe the position of the jaws relative to the base of the skull.


(http://www.jorthodr.org/articles/2013/1/2/images/JOrthodRes_2013_1_2_52_116287_f4.jpg)
Title: Re: Do people who favor the "Anteface" look aim for an abnormally high SNA/SNB?
Post by: secondtimearound on December 31, 2017, 11:24:13 AM
This is in the Biodynamics analysis. Sagittal - Apical Base Position

SNA

Mean: 82
Standard Dev: 2
Myself: 81.03
Comment: none

SNB

Mean: 79
Standard Dev: 2
Myself: 81.97
Comment: Mandible protruded

ANB

Mean: 3
Standard Dev: 2
Myself: -0.94
Comment: Class III relationship

Your lower jaw is more protruded than maybe 70-80% of people.

Your upper jaw is slightly retruded compared to the statistical average but it's damn near perfect.

Can you post your Wits analysis? Search the pdf for wits. Also in general how is your bite?

Are you male or female?

If you're male I think these are quite good.
Title: Re: Do people who favor the "Anteface" look aim for an abnormally high SNA/SNB?
Post by: secondtimearound on December 31, 2017, 11:35:43 AM
Wow, this study confirms everything that I don't like about my results.

Occlusal Plane

Mean: 14
Standard Dev: 3
Myself: 5.67
Comment: closed occlusal plane

Nasolabial angle: 78

It sais my lips, my teeth, my mandible protrudes too much, my occlusal plane goes upwards!

Holy s**t. Do you have a before ceph to get an analysis to compare with?

Unless you were already tilted like that the surgeon must have done mega CCW. Are you impacted on the upper jaw? How many mm of upper teeth are visible with your lips parted at rest?

Also male or female? I'm guessing female?

Lastly post your Wits as requested.
Title: Re: Do people who favor the "Anteface" look aim for an abnormally high SNA/SNB?
Post by: secondtimearound on December 31, 2017, 11:41:59 AM
I was not tilter like that. My occlusal plane was good preop. He massively downgraded my maxilla anteriorly and posteriorly.

So the problem is the heavy ccw rotation he provided with a massive tilt to your jaws. Your jaws are not too far forward. They're pretty much perfect. But you've been rotated to oblivion.

That could definitely justify a revision.

I'm curious - can you PM or post the surgeon? I actually need a bit of ccw. They obviously love providing it... Though unreasonably so in this case.
Title: Re: Do people who favor the "Anteface" look aim for an abnormally high SNA/SNB?
Post by: PloskoPlus on December 31, 2017, 12:11:04 PM
90.4, 86.9
Title: Re: Do people who favor the "Anteface" look aim for an abnormally high SNA/SNB?
Post by: ditterbo on December 31, 2017, 01:14:58 PM
I don't know what your ceph outline looked like pre-op, but interesting that my Gunson-proposed bimax outline diagram doesn't advance nor use CCW quite as much as your current state, and yet he said this outline would have helped "even severe OSA". BTW you should've posted either this ceph outline or your x-ray weeks ago for better information.  Also, don't trust all measurements taken from cephx. There's another thread with Kavan explaining why.  What are those numbers, Plosko?
Title: Re: Do people who favor the "Anteface" look aim for an abnormally high SNA/SNB?
Post by: ditterbo on December 31, 2017, 01:45:33 PM
I'm referring to your ceph xray.  I thought you took a picture of it but didn't get an official copy from the doc. If it worked for cephx though, it would've been helpful here as well. Don't take the cephx occlusal plane number literally.  They were off 3 degrees on mine.
Title: Re: Do people who favor the "Anteface" look aim for an abnormally high SNA/SNB?
Post by: PloskoPlus on December 31, 2017, 01:55:04 PM
I don't know what your ceph outline looked like pre-op, but interesting that my Gunson-proposed bimax outline diagram doesn't advance nor use CCW quite as much as your current state, and yet he said this outline would have helped "even severe OSA". BTW you should've posted either this ceph outline or your x-ray weeks ago for better information.  Also, don't trust all measurements taken from cephx. There's another thread with Kavan explaining why.  What are those numbers, Plosko?
My SNA, SNB numbers.
Title: Re: Do people who favor the "Anteface" look aim for an abnormally high SNA/SNB?
Post by: qwe on December 31, 2017, 02:24:34 PM
I know what you mean,

I was from the begging sold on antefaces, but honestly I've realised that I really dont like the swollen look it gives, as you are hiding something under your lip.
If you look at this guy, after his bimax surgery he just looks swollen, https://i.imgur.com/E4hw11t.jpg because his face dont suit the big maxilla.
Compare it to Errol Flynn, that also have a ''forward profile'' but without a prominant maxilla, https://i.pinimg.com/236x/76/b3/45/76b3451b2124b8e1d0ed0f5f364696b5--errol-flynn-classic-movies.jpg,
his nose is long,and his philrum is pushed out little with it, I think  this looks alot better than having a to strong maxilla, especially on caucasian males

Lisa fonssagrives is also an example of what I mean,
http://i9.lisimg.com/7469179/280full.jpg she does have a forward face, but without her maxilla looking to bloated.

Also,Often people like Angelina Jolie are told to have an anteface, but really I dont know if that's the case here, I think her maxilla is normal, with an very agressive mandibular+m-angle, https://i.pinimg.com/736x/b5/ff/e6/b5ffe6245aaefed9d062b06c50732fed--angelina-jolie-young-female-faces.jpg,
(again as Errol Flynn, And LF,philrum + big lips mimic a more forward face), you can see that her face looks slick in a way compare to someone as Elizabeth Banks that has this ''bloated maxilla look'' http://www.wallpapers-web.com/data/out/72/4360462-elizabeth-banks-wallpapers.jpg.

Conclusion, if you want an anteface from surgery, be prepared to look like Willem Dafoe after.
/Qwe
Title: Re: Do people who favor the "Anteface" look aim for an abnormally high SNA/SNB?
Post by: secondtimearound on December 31, 2017, 03:40:04 PM
Mazilla you will need a revision bsso and lf1 to undo the excessive ccw. You should ask them to keep your front top iincisor exactly where it is and rotate everything from that point. The back top will be impacted. You might want to aim for 8-10 degrees occlusional plane.

People complaining about measurements being off a few degrees should understand this isn't a perfect science. There is always a small margin of error based on how you define the landmarks eg. The center point of S.

The point is it all gives you a general understanding of the trends of your face and what to do about them.
Title: Re: Do people who favor the "Anteface" look aim for an abnormally high SNA/SNB?
Post by: secondtimearound on December 31, 2017, 03:48:38 PM
I know what you mean,

I was from the begging sold on antefaces, but honestly I've realised that I really dont like the swollen look it gives, as you are hiding something under your lip.
If you look at this guy, after his bimax surgery he just looks swollen, https://i.imgur.com/E4hw11t.jpg because his face dont suit the big maxilla.
Compare it to Errol Flynn, that also have a ''forward profile'' but without a prominant maxilla, https://i.pinimg.com/236x/76/b3/45/76b3451b2124b8e1d0ed0f5f364696b5--errol-flynn-classic-movies.jpg,
his nose is long,and his philrum is pushed out little with it, I think  this looks alot better than having a to strong maxilla, especially on caucasian males

Lisa fonssagrives is also an example of what I mean,
http://i9.lisimg.com/7469179/280full.jpg she does have a forward face, but without her maxilla looking to bloated.

Also,Often people like Angelina Jolie are told to have an anteface, but really I dont know if that's the case here, I think her maxilla is normal, with an very agressive mandibular+m-angle, https://i.pinimg.com/736x/b5/ff/e6/b5ffe6245aaefed9d062b06c50732fed--angelina-jolie-young-female-faces.jpg,
(again as Errol Flynn, And LF,philrum + big lips mimic a more forward face), you can see that her face looks slick in a way compare to someone as Elizabeth Banks that has this ''bloated maxilla look'' http://www.wallpapers-web.com/data/out/72/4360462-elizabeth-banks-wallpapers.jpg.

Conclusion, if you want an anteface from surgery, be prepared to look like Willem Dafoe after.
/Qwe

All fair to state. I think the other thing that has to be taken into account is what someone said earlier in the thread about black people having more bulbous foreheads.

I have a bulbous forehead as well. It does not slope back above my eyebrows. It goes straight up.

If I retruded my jaws to the ideal sna/snb it actually makes my face look less balanced by bringing more prominence to my forehead.

So I guess we can't all aim for the exact same targets and possibly having perfect cephalometric data is not always going to be the aesthetic ideal.

As a counterpoint, here's Jordan Barrett who definitely looks a bit odd but also beautiful and has the most forewards jaw of any white guy I've seen.

(http://az617363.vo.msecnd.net/cmsroot/imgmodels/media/content/news/jordanbarrett_shinebythree/jordan-barrett-margaret-zhang_2951-600x800_1.jpg)
Title: Re: Do people who favor the "Anteface" look aim for an abnormally high SNA/SNB?
Post by: kavan on December 31, 2017, 04:22:48 PM
Wow, this study confirms everything that I don't like about my results.

Occlusal Plane

Mean: 14
Standard Dev: 3
Myself: 5.67
Comment: closed occlusal plane

Nasolabial angle: 78

It sais my lips, my teeth, my mandible protrudes too much, my occlusal plane goes upwards!

What is the NAME of the analysis that is telling you the 'mean' of the OP is 14 degrees? Is it the Steiner analysis?  In some analysis (say Downs) 14 degree OP is associated with the MAX, not the mean. 1.5 is associated with minimum and the mean is 9.3. It is the angle the OP line makes with the Frankfort horizontal line.

the angle your OP makes with a horizont is about 6 degrees when i do an estimate using a line closer to that of a horizont (say Downs).


Title: Re: Do people who favor the "Anteface" look aim for an abnormally high SNA/SNB?
Post by: secondtimearound on December 31, 2017, 04:41:24 PM
Thanks second time around. I would want the anterior maxilla impacted as well, but more the posterior to allow for the CW rotation. Why do I need double jaw surgery if im only getting a rotation? I dont get it

Because the jaws need to meet and the teeth need to bite. If you only rotated the top, the lower teeth would no longer meet. You need both rotated together to maintain the bite. If you want the front impacted you could do that as well.

For a man you generally want 1-2 mm of teeth visible at the front upper incisor when the lips are apart but at rest.
Title: Re: Do people who favor the "Anteface" look aim for an abnormally high SNA/SNB?
Post by: kavan on December 31, 2017, 05:08:36 PM
Mazilla you will need a revision bsso and lf1 to undo the excessive ccw. You should ask them to keep your front top iincisor exactly where it is and rotate everything from that point. The back top will be impacted. You might want to aim for 8-10 degrees occlusional plane.

People complaining about measurements being off a few degrees should understand this isn't a perfect science. There is always a small margin of error based on how you define the landmarks eg. The center point of S.

The point is it all gives you a general understanding of the trends of your face and what to do about them.

Mazilla's MEASUREMENTS can be seen on his very first post on JSF.
http://jawsurgeryforums.com/index.php?topic=7017.msg60319#msg60319

From the string, his main concern is that he looks 'too different' from 'himself' or what he was used to. He discloses that people who never saw what he looked like prior, find him attractive. He realizes he looks much better in terms of aesthetics or attractiveness. BUT he's NOT happy with that. He's 'attached' to most of his prior look and it doesn't matter to him that most people would prefer his after look than his before. So, do familiarize yourself with his initial string here which also has the numbers of his displacements.

I am not too sure he got "massive" CCW.  A significant CCW would correspond to either a hefty isolated anterior impaction or a hefty isolated posterior downgraft. He did NOT have ANY anterior impaction. It looks to me that he got an overall downgraft with a little more posterior which would have to be the case for any CCW where NO anterior impaction was done.

Also, as to SNA, SNB, and ANB angles which Steiner used, I would not give absolute credence to those in every situation. They arise from the S point being easier to spot in an X ray than the Po (Porion) point used to connect with the Or point (Orbitale) to get the Frankfort horizont.

Hence, the S-N line is used as an alternative reference. Thing is the S-N line is fine when the deviation from a horizont is within 7 degrees. But the more the S-N line deviates enough from 7 degrees away from a horizont, different adjustments have to be made for balance. So, I would not be using SNA,SNB and ANB as 'absolutes' in cases where the S-N line deviates much from 7 degrees from a horizont.
Title: Re: Do people who favor the "Anteface" look aim for an abnormally high SNA/SNB?
Post by: qwe on December 31, 2017, 05:16:00 PM
I understand
My advice to you,

I think it would be smarter to do something for the forhead then, instead to force your jaws to be overadvanced
why I commented here was because I've seen surgery´results in office with famous named dr's, where people wanted to have very strong jaws and ended up with the ''chimp look''.
To push the limit dont give this ''mma fighter look'' people want more likely as you are hiding some food under your upperlip.

The thing I want to tell you is that from my experince,  before my surgery  my small lower jaw was the issue for me, and alot of surgerons wanted to overadvance my jaws, making the maxilla also to strong.
Two high name dr's instead recommended me 50-60% smaller movements, + doing a chin wing/implants to adress the real issue, and ofc for the better look.


I understand what you mean, JB definetly doesnt have the most fg jaws for a cacause male.
the beautiful part is subjective, to femine looking male for me but I know that he is famous on  ''look**** sites''.

/qwe

Title: Re: Do people who favor the "Anteface" look aim for an abnormally high SNA/SNB?
Post by: kavan on December 31, 2017, 05:48:49 PM
Yes it was Steiner.

Is 6 degrees normal? It seems my OP is divergent. Ive never see a divergent OP, only flat or convergent.

Well your OP is about 6 degrees with reference to a horizont. So, let's say you used an analysis system where the Frankfort horizont was used as relative compare line (assuming your FH is in fact horizontal). IF the standard deviation were about 3 and the mean was 9.3, 9.3-6=3.3 and you would be pretty close to norm for a 6 degree OP.

I believe that is what ditterbo was saying when he told you his was off 3 degrees. What's off is some of those ceph read outs are not useful if you don't know what they are in reference to and you just take as an 'absolute' number. For example, I could GUESS your OP analysis was the Steiner BECAUSE 14 degrees is NOT the 'mean' for a type that uses the Frankfort horizont. But is when the S-N line is used it is.

Thing with Steiner analysis for SNA, B and ANB, it is not that reliable as an absolute when the SN line deviates too much from 7 degrees away from a horizont.

Does your cephX read out show you a diagram where the Po and Orbitale points are?  (Po, Or). those points are useful to see if your Frankfort Horizont is actually horizontal. But they are harder for an automated program to spot on an X ray.

Title: Re: Do people who favor the "Anteface" look aim for an abnormally high SNA/SNB?
Post by: ditterbo on December 31, 2017, 06:15:15 PM
Actually I meant the occlusal plane I was given in Clark Analysis and Downs Analysis was 10.8 degrees (not referring to the norm/deviation stuff).  A surgeon measured my OP angle at 13.5 degrees.
Title: Re: Do people who favor the "Anteface" look aim for an abnormally high SNA/SNB?
Post by: kavan on December 31, 2017, 06:23:28 PM
Actually I meant the occlusal plane I was given in Clark Analysis and Downs Analysis was 10.8 degrees (not referring to the norm/deviation stuff).  A surgeon measured my OP angle at 13.5 degrees.

That sounds right. I too saw your cephs too and measured your OP at 14 degrees.
Title: Re: Do people who favor the "Anteface" look aim for an abnormally high SNA/SNB?
Post by: kavan on December 31, 2017, 08:08:07 PM
I dont have the Po, Or diagram.

My occlusal plane according to Downs and Clarck Analysis is 1.95

Kavan, I dont want to look like my old self. I want to have orthognatic profile, not prognathic. I want to have a normal occlusal plane and normal nasolabial angle. All those would make me look a bit more like my old self, but obviously different. What I got now I feel is way too much rotation. We will know for sure when I get my preop ceph analysis.

Actually, your IMGUR link, https://imgur.com/a/HVb0w  does have where Po and Or points can be found. They were just not marked as were the other points. It's the line tangent to the lower orbital rim. This reveals your Frankfort Horizont is NOT horizontal. It's about  8 degrees deviant from a horizont.  The S-N line also deviates 5 degrees from the norm inclination of 7 degrees away from a true horizont.

It's hard to have a truly orthognathic profile when the Frankfort line deviates a lot from a true horizont and when the S-N line also deviates in excess of 7 degrees of a horizont. Also, these measures you find in these auto generated ceph analysis are going to be 'off' when the deviation of the reference 'horizonts', themselves are 'off'. So, that's when adjustments need to be made for balance as to compensate for 'horizonts' that DEVIATE too much from horizontal.

You know, the ANCIENTS used pure horizonts and pure verticals in accordance with esoteric geometry of balance to construct  ideal proportions and angles when designing a face. None of this cephX stuff.  Looks like your doctor also used a pure horizont for the OP (which is around 6 degrees with reference to that) and gave you a good vertical line up for the face.


Title: Re: Do people who favor the "Anteface" look aim for an abnormally high SNA/SNB?
Post by: secondtimearound on January 01, 2018, 06:23:34 AM
This is my preop diagram: https://imgur.com/a/S8vzX

My occ plane was 15.98 according to Steiner analysis.

I had 10 degrees of CCW when my preop occlusal plane was flat, is that correct? Isn't that madness? I feel that is what makes me look protruded, what messes up my nasolabial angle... So I think that is the problem, the massive unnecessary CCW rotation.

Should I open a new post about this not to fill this ante face thread?

I don't care if you post here or in a new thread. I'm not particular that way.

One thing I'll say that's interesting is how your SN line is so angled compared to your other lines. Your preop has almost everything else parallel except your SN line. But yeah your jaws looked pretty flat already and that ccw put them way out of alignment.

Did you have a very masculine face before the jaw surgery? I have a theory that generally parallel facial planes looks more masculine. Little girls in particular have planes that di verge greatly like a fan opening and radiating out to the right.

My face has too much divergence opening to the right and it makes my face look beta and weak I think. Not manly. I'll post my diagram here to compare just because we have such different ones and I think it's interesting. Sadly I don't have my original preop xrays.
Title: Re: Do people who favor the "Anteface" look aim for an abnormally high SNA/SNB?
Post by: secondtimearound on January 01, 2018, 08:00:11 AM
I just think it's funny to point out how incredibly different our facial lines are.

I'm going to make a separate thread for my own advice request.

But pertinent to the thread, I already have a slightly high SNA/SNB according to cephx...

However Sassouni analysis shows my upper jaw as retruded by about 4 mm and Wits shows class 3 also by 4 mm.

I think judging jaw positions requires a very holistic approach looking at all these analyses to tell.

How was your Sassouni?