Key Points
-
The results of this study suggest that the 'golden proportion' should not be a single value but rather a range.
-
Hypodontia patients showed a preference to a longer lateral incisor as compared to the other groups.
-
What is aesthetically pleasing to the clinician and patient may not be the same.
-
Communication and presentation of all diagnostic information to the patient is essential when undertaking treatment planning.
Abstract
Objective The aim of this study was to determine the influence of varying the dimensions of the maxillary lateral incisors on perceived smile aesthetics.
Design Clinical study.
Setting Postgraduate dental teaching hospital.
Methods A photograph of a female smile displaying only the lips and teeth was digitally altered. First, the width of the maxillary lateral incisors, in proportion to the central incisor, was altered at 5% intervals to produce six images (52%, 57%, 62% [the 'golden proportion'], 67%, 72% and 77%). In a second group, the length of the lateral incisor was altered at 0.5 mm increments to produce five images with the lateral incisor 0.5 mm, 1 mm, 1.5 mm, 2 mm and 2.5 mm shorter than the adjacent central incisor. The photos were ranked from 'most attractive' to 'least attractive' by 41 hypodontia patients, 46 non-hypodontia 'control' patients and 30 dentists.
Results: The 67% followed by the 72% lateral-to-central width proportions were the 'most preferred' by all groups. A maxillary lateral incisor that is 1-1.5 mm shorter than the central incisor was the 'most popular' maxillary lateral incisor length. The very short and very long maxillary lateral incisor was consistently perceived as 'least attractive'.
Conclusion There is no evidence to suggest that the golden proportion should be considered the ideal aesthetic standard when creating space for the replacement of missing lateral incisors.
Similar content being viewed by others
Log in or create a free account to read this content
Gain free access to this article, as well as selected content from this journal and more on nature.com
or
References
Coffield K D, Phillips C, Brady M, Roberts M W, Strauss R P, Wright J T. The psychosocial impact of developmental dental defects in people with hereditary amelogenesis imperfecta. J Am Dent Assoc 2005; 136: 620–630.
Shaw W C. The influence of children's dentofacial appearance on their social attractiveness as judged by peers and lay adults. Am J Orthod 1981; 79: 399–415.
Shapiro S D, Farrington F H. A potpourri of syndromes with anomalies of dentition. Birth Defects Orig Artic Ser 1983; 19: 129–140.
Polder B J, Van't Hof M A, Van der Linden F P, Kuijpers-Jagtman A M. A meta-analysis of the prevalence of dental agenesis of permanent teeth. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 2004; 32: 217–226.
McNeill R W, Joondeph D R. Congenitally absent maxillary lateral incisors: treatment planning considerations. Angle Orthod 1973; 43: 24–29.
Tuverson D L. Orthodontic treatment using canines in place of missing maxillary lateral incisors. Am J Orthod 1970; 58: 109–127.
Zachrisson B U. Esthetic factors involved in anterior tooth display and the smile: vertical dimension. J Clin Orthod 1998; 35: 7432–7445.
Jepson N J, Nohl F S, Carter N E et al. The interdisciplinary management of hypodontia: restorative dentistry. Br Dent J 2003; 194: 299–304.
Nunn J H, Carter N E, Gillgrass T J et al. The interdisciplinary management of hypodontia: background and role of paediatric dentistry. Br Dent J 2003; 194: 245–251.
Kinzer G A, Kokich V O Jr. Managing congenitally missing lateral incisors. Part III: single-tooth implants. J Esthet Restor Dent 2005; 17: 202–210.
Kinzer G A, Kokich V O Jr. Managing congenitally missing lateral incisors. Part II: tooth-supported restorations. J Esthet Restor Dent 2005; 17: 76–84.
Bolton W A. Disharmony in tooth size and its relation to the analysis and treatment of malocclusion. Am J Orthod 1958; 28: 113–130.
Freeman J E, Maskeroni A J, Lorton L. Frequency of Bolton tooth-size discrepancies among orthodontic patients. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1996: 110: 24–27.
Levin E I. Dental esthetics and the golden proportion. J Prosthet Dent 1978; 40: 244–252.
Lombardi R E. The principles of visual perception and their clinical application to denture esthetics. J Prosthet Dent 1973; 29: 358–382.
Carter N E, Gillgrass T J, Hobson R S et al. The interdisciplinary management of hypodontia: orthodontics. Br Dent J 2003; 194: 361–366.
Qualtrough A J, Burke F J. A look at dental esthetics. Quintessence Int 1994; 25: 7–14.
Hasanreisoglu U, Berksun S, Aras K, Arslan I. An analysis of maxillary anterior teeth: facial and dental proportions. J Prosthet Dent 2005; 94: 530–538.
Rosenstiel S F, Ward D H, Rashid R G. Dentists' preferences of anterior tooth proportion – a web-based study. J Prosthodont 2000; 9: 123–136.
Wolfart S, Thormann H, Freitag S, Kern M. Assessment of dental appearance following changes in incisor proportions. Eur J Oral Sci 2005; 113: 159–165.
Gillen R J, Schwartz R S, Hilton T J, Evans D B. An analysis of selected normative tooth proportions. Int J Prosthodont 1994; 7: 410–417.
Preston J D. The golden proportion revisited. J Esthet Dent 1993; 5: 247–251.
Kokich V O Jr, Kiyak H A, Shapiro, P A. Comparing the perception of dentists and lay people to altered dental esthetics. J Esthet Dent 1999; 11: 311–324.
Sarver D M, Ackerman M B. Dynamic smile visualization and quantification: Part 2. Smile analysis and treatment strategies. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2003; 124: 116–127.
Brisman A S. Esthetics: a comparison of dentists' and patients' concepts. J Am Dent Assoc 1980; 100: 345–352.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Refereed paper
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Bukhary, S., Gill, D., Tredwin, C. et al. The influence of varying maxillary lateral incisor dimensions on perceived smile aesthetics. Br Dent J 203, 687–693 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1038/bdj.2007.1110
Accepted:
Published:
Issue date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/bdj.2007.1110
This article is cited by
-
Does different vertical position of maxillary central incisors in women with different facial vertical height affect smile esthetics perception?
Progress in Orthodontics (2023)
-
Aesthetic evaluation of the labiolingual position of maxillary lateral incisors by orthodontists and laypersons
BMC Oral Health (2021)
-
Canine edge width and height affect dental esthetics in maxillary canine substitution treatment
Progress in Orthodontics (2019)
-
Occlusal height difference between maxillary central and lateral incisors: should aesthetic perception influence bracket placement?
Head & Face Medicine (2019)
-
Does the gender of the subject affect perceived smile aesthetics when varying the dimensions of maxillary lateral incisors?
British Dental Journal (2018)
