Thin upper lip with the linear height ratio of the upper to lower lip is 1:2. Oral Health
Conditions
Interventions
Forty female healthy patients aged between 18-45 years will be randomly divided into two groups using http://www.randomization.com:
Group A: Upper lip augmentation using the V-Y in V-Y surgical techn
Sponsors
Damascus University
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
Female
Inclusion criteria
Inclusion criteria: 1. Healthy individuals with the linear height ratio of the upper to lower lip is 1:2 2. Lip fullness grade of 0 to 2 according to the Merz scale
Exclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria: 1. Patient had undergone lip augmentation procedures before or during the study period 2. Patient had undergone orthodontic treatment that was not yet completed 3. Patient scheduled for facial surgery during the study period that could impact the final lip augmentation results were excluded
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame |
|---|---|
| 1. The amount of change in the linear height of the upper lip (apparent) which is estimated based on the following axes: Axis (1): A reference line at the base of the nose. A. The distance between the commissures Ch-Ch' (denoted as 2). B. The linear height of the white upper lip in the middle Sn-Bc (denoted as 3). C. The linear height of the red upper lip in the middle sto-Bc (denoted as 4). D. The linear height of the lateral white upper lip from point Tc to the lower edge of the nasal base, parallel to axis 3 (denoted as 5). E. The linear height of the lateral red upper lip from point Tc, parallel to the line sto-Bc, extending to the oral commissure (denoted as 6). F. The linear height of the lateral white upper lip on the corresponding side of axis 5 (denoted as 5'). G. The linear height of the lateral red upper lip on the corresponding side of axis 6 (denoted as 6'). 2. The amount of change in the nasolabial angle using lateral photographs analysis This outcomes were assessed by a blinded committee that was unaware of the specific surgical procedure performed. This assessment was conducted one month and six months after the procedure. | — |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame |
|---|---|
| Patient satisfaction is evaluated and compared between the two groups at two time points: one month and six months after the procedure. A Visual Analog Scale (VAS) was used for this purpose. The VAS consists of a horizontal 10 cm line with descriptors at each end representing the extremes of satisfaction (i.e., complete dissatisfaction and extreme satisfaction). Patients indicate their level of satisfaction by marking this line. Measurements were converted into a score ranging from 0 to 10 points. The primary question was: "How satisfied are you with the technique applied to you?". The question was posed by a blinded committee that was unaware of the specific surgical procedure performed. This assessment was conducted both one month, three months, and six months after the procedure. | — |
Countries
Syria
Contacts
Public ContactSamer Shekh Khalil
Outcome results
None listed