Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2024 Jan;48(2):177-186.
doi: 10.1007/s00266-023-03438-4. Epub 2023 Jul 10.

Chin Dysmorphology in the Primary Rhinoplasty Population: Prevalence, Objective Analysis, and Implications

Affiliations
Review

Chin Dysmorphology in the Primary Rhinoplasty Population: Prevalence, Objective Analysis, and Implications

Demetrius M Coombs et al. Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2024 Jan.

Abstract

Background: Chin flaws are far more common than recognized. Denial of genioplasty by parents or adult patients can present a surgical planning enigma, especially in patients with microgenia and chin deviation. This study aims to investigate the frequency of chin imperfections on patients seeking rhinoplasty, review the conundrum they generate, and offer management suggestions based on over 40 years of the senior author's experience.

Methods: This review included 108 consecutive patients presenting for primary rhinoplasty. Demographics, soft tissue cephalometrics, and surgical details were obtained. Exclusion criteria included prior orthognathic or isolated chin surgery, mandiblular trauma, or congenital craniofacial deformities.

Results: Of the 108 patients, 92 (85.2%) were female. Mean age was 30.8 years (SD±13, range 14-72). Ninety-seven (89.8%) patients exhibited some degree of objective chin dysmorphology. Fifteen (13.9%) had Class I deformities (macrogenia), 63 (58.3%) Class II (microgenia), and 14 (12.9%) Class III (combined macro and microgenia in the horizontal or vertical vectors). Forty-one (38%) patients had Class IV deformities (asymmetry). While all patients were offered the opportunity to correct chin flaws, only 11 (10.1%) underwent such procedures. Five (4.6%) patients had simultaneous osseous genioplasty (mean advancement 7.8mm, range 5-9mm); 7 (6.5%) received fat grafting to the chin (mean volume 4.4cc, range 1-9cc).

Conclusions: A considerable proportion of primary rhinoplasty patients possess quantifiable chin dysmorphology on circumspect examination, high-resolution photographs and cephalometric analysis. Only a small number agree to surgical interventions that pursue full facial harmony. Potential reasons for these findings, patient aversion, and mitigation strategies will be discussed.

Level of evidence iii: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these evidence-based medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .

Keywords: Chin; Dysmorphology; Genioplasty; Prevalence; Rhinoplasty.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Guyuron B, Michelow BJ, Willis L (1995) Practical classification of chin deformities. Aesthetic Plast Surg 19(3):257–264 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Aufricht G (1958) Combined plastic surgery of the nose and chin; résumé of twenty-seven years’ experience. Am J Surg 95(2):231–236 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Millard DR (1971) Augmentation mentoplasty. Surg Clin North Am 51(2):333–340 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Spear SL, Kassan M (1989) Genioplasty. Clin Plast Surg 16(4):695–706 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Szachowicz E, Kridel RW (1987) Adjunctive measures to rhinoplasty. Otolaryngol Clin North Am 20(4):895–912 - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources