Comprehensive Smile Component Analysis in Unilateral Cleft Lip and Palate Using Akhter–Anne Framework

ObjectiveThis study aimed to comprehensively compare smile aesthetics between surgically corrected unilateral cleft lip and palate (CUCLP) patients and non-cleft controls, evaluating multiple facial domains to identify persistent deficits.DesignA cross-sectional, comparative study was conducted.SettingThe study was performed in a clinical research setting.Patients/ParticipantsThe cohort consisted of 30 CUCLP patients who had undergone surgical repair and 30 age- and sex-matched non-cleft controls, all aged between 16 and 30 years.InterventionsThe intervention for the patient group was prior surgical correction of CUCLP; no new intervention was administered as part of this observational study.Main Outcome Measure(s)Standardized frontal photographs were analyzed using MAKHTER software and the Akhter-Anne Smile Diagram. Key parameters measured across facial, nasal, labial, nasolabial, and dento-gingival domains included nasal width, commissure width, philtrum height, lip length, and incisor display.ResultsThe facial component showed no significant differences. However, CUCLP patients exhibited significant deficits in other domains: reduced philtrum height (0.58 ± 0.21 mm vs. 0.84 ± 0.31 mm; p = 0.004), shorter upper lip length (0.42 ± 0.14 mm vs. 0.62 ± 0.22 mm; p = 0.001), and narrower commissure width (4.23 ± 0.52 mm vs. 6.95 ± 0.90 mm; p < 0.001). Nasal width was reduced (3.25 ± 0.40 mm vs. 4.56 ± 0.54 mm; p < 0.001) with pronounced nasolabial asymmetry. Dento-gingivally, maxillary incisor show was less (1.80 ± 0.54 mm vs. 3.45 ± 0.63 mm; p < 0.01) while mandibular incisor display was greater (2.75 ± 0.48 mm vs. 1.25 ± 0.36 mm; p < 0.05).ConclusionsDespite surgical repair, CUCLP patients have persistent esthetic impairments, particularly in the nasolabial and dento-gingival regions. A structured, multi-domain smile analysis is crucial for guiding multidisciplinary treatment to optimize final aesthetic and psychosocial outcomes.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
The Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Journal
Published
2026-02-25
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/10556656261426215
Primary Topic
Cleft Lip and Palate Research
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Comprehensive Smile Component Analysis in Unilateral Cleft Lip and Palate Using Akhter–Anne Framework

Shafees Koya, Dilshad Umar, Akhter Husain, Andrade Tanvi Sera Noel
The Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Journal
Cleft Lip and Palate Research
article

Comprehensive Smile Component Analysis in Unilateral Cleft Lip and Palate Using Akhter–Anne Framework

Shafees Koya, Dilshad Umar, Akhter Husain, Andrade Tanvi Sera Noel
article en

Abstract

ObjectiveThis study aimed to comprehensively compare smile aesthetics between surgically corrected unilateral cleft lip and palate (CUCLP) patients and non-cleft controls, evaluating multiple facial domains to identify persistent deficits.DesignA cross-sectional, comparative study was conducted.SettingThe study was performed in a clinical research setting.Patients/ParticipantsThe cohort consisted of 30 CUCLP patients who had undergone surgical repair and 30 age- and sex-matched non-cleft controls, all aged between 16 and 30 years.InterventionsThe intervention for the patient group was prior surgical correction of CUCLP; no new intervention was administered as part of this observational study.Main Outcome Measure(s)Standardized frontal photographs were analyzed using MAKHTER software and the Akhter-Anne Smile Diagram. Key parameters measured across facial, nasal, labial, nasolabial, and dento-gingival domains included nasal width, commissure width, philtrum height, lip length, and incisor display.ResultsThe facial component showed no significant differences. However, CUCLP patients exhibited significant deficits in other domains: reduced philtrum height (0.58 ± 0.21 mm vs. 0.84 ± 0.31 mm; p = 0.004), shorter upper lip length (0.42 ± 0.14 mm vs. 0.62 ± 0.22 mm; p = 0.001), and narrower commissure width (4.23 ± 0.52 mm vs. 6.95 ± 0.90 mm; p < 0.001). Nasal width was reduced (3.25 ± 0.40 mm vs. 4.56 ± 0.54 mm; p < 0.001) with pronounced nasolabial asymmetry. Dento-gingivally, maxillary incisor show was less (1.80 ± 0.54 mm vs. 3.45 ± 0.63 mm; p < 0.01) while mandibular incisor display was greater (2.75 ± 0.48 mm vs. 1.25 ± 0.36 mm; p < 0.05).ConclusionsDespite surgical repair, CUCLP patients have persistent esthetic impairments, particularly in the nasolabial and dento-gingival regions. A structured, multi-domain smile analysis is crucial for guiding multidisciplinary treatment to optimize final aesthetic and psychosocial outcomes.

The Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Journal
Yenepoya University (IN)
Openalex Percentile: Top 42%
Cleft Lip and Palate Research
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.