Notifications
Clear all

NOTICE:

DO NOT ATTEMPT TREATMENT WITHOUT LICENCED MEDICAL CONSULTATION AND SUPERVISION

This is a public discussion forum. The owners, staff, and users of this website are not engaged in rendering professional services to the individual reader. Do not use the content of this website as an alternative to personal examination and advice from licenced healthcare providers. Do not begin, delay, or discontinue treatments and/or exercises without licenced medical supervision.

Elements of Smile Aesthetics and Craniofacial Dystrophy

Apollo
Reputable Member

I have been ruminating about how craniofacial dystrophy is reflected in more detailed elements of smile aesthetics. One example that seems intuitive to me is that a gummy smile reflects a downswung maxilla. For example, journalist Erica Hill has a significant band of gingival tissue visible. But what about those of us who don't have a gummy smile? Does that indicate our maxillas are positioned high enough? I don't think it is that simple because the soft tissue drops down with the underlying bony structure. 

Buccal corridors are another element of smile aesthetics that seems pretty unmistakable. A narrower maxillary arch leaves more space between the cheeks and the teeth. I think a recessed maxilla also contributes because the molars and bicuspids are more shadowed when they sit farther back in the face. For example, swimmer Michael Phelps has a narrow palate which results in conspicuous buccal corridors.

The Curve of Spee or the "smile arc" seems like an especially important aspect of smile aesthetics, but its relationship to craniofacial dystrophy is less apparent to me. 

 

So with an ideal smile arch, as seen in figure A above, the cusps of the teeth follow the curve of the lower lip, with the central incisors extending lower than the lateral incisors, which extend lower than the canines, etc. It seems to me that this also relates to how much gingival exposure you will have. If your central incisors are intruded relative to the ideal smile arch, the upper lip will cover the top of the tooth and gums. This is my problem. When I smile, the gingival tissue is visible above my bicuspids and molars, but my upper lip covers the gums above my incisors and canines. The cusps of my incisors and canines are all at about the same level giving me a straight or plane smile arc (close to figure B, but with less gingival exposure in the front).

I am trying to synthesize how these elements of smile aesthetics relate with one another and with craniofacial dystrophy. One concern I had was if those of us without excessive gingival exposure shift the maxilla up and forward will this result in too much of the maxillary teeth being covered by the upper lip. I suspect it is possible to move the maxilla up and forward without negatively impacting where the vermilion border of the upper lip lies in relation to the teeth for two reasons: 1) the soft tissue will also shift up to some degree when we move up the underlying maxilla structure, and 2) moving the maxilla forward fills out that soft tissue in the horizontal direction so that there is less of it to drape down in the vertical direction. Maybe a maxilla that is down and forward creates a gummy smile whereas a maxilla down and back allows the upper lip to hang down and cover the gums. Does this make sense? Do you agree that it is OK to shift the maxilla up and forward even when your smiling upper lip already covers the top of your central incisors? Should I set my extraoral anchorage to pull more forward than up? Should I be trying to pull up more in the back than the front?

Quote
Topic starter Posted : 09/02/2018 4:56 pm
Silver
 Silver
Guest

subscribed to this thread

ReplyQuote
Posted : 09/02/2018 11:17 pm
Apollo
Reputable Member

Let's talk about philtrum length. There have been a few questions about a period of duck-like appearance that people report after they start to make progress with mewing. I haven't experienced this myself, and maybe that's just because I haven't made much progress. Originally I speculated from other's accounts that it results from the front teeth tipping because people might thrust their tongues out too far without adequate palate space. However, @Jeffrey and @Sclera seem to think it is just the lips pouting and not the teeth holding the lips out. I guess it could be that the soft tissue of the lips puckers out when the underlying bony structure shortens. That might be what is going on with the woman in the picture posted by @Jeffrey (  https://the-great-work.org/community/main-forum/questions-on-airway/ ).

Image result for asian face side profile

In my previous post on this thread, I asked about what happens to the length of the upper lip when we move the maxilla up and forward. I am concerned because my upper lip already covers the tops of my incisors and canines, unlike people with significant gingival exposure who could benefit from moving their teeth up farther under their upper lip. I speculated that the soft tissue will move up or fill out as the maxilla moves up and forward so that more of my teeth wouldn't be hidden by the upper lip. I got to thinking that this might relate to the duck-face questions. Maybe there is a period in the process where the midface shortens, causing the mandible to swing up and bring the lower lip with it, but the upper lip is still long so the two lips pout out, until either the soft tissue tightens up or the maxilla moving forward fills it out. The philtrum is the notch between the nose and upper lip, so measuring the philtrum reflects the length of the upper lip. My philtrum looks to be about 19mm long. I can't find a primary source, but sketchy internet sites claim that the ideal aesthetic philtrum length is 13-15mm for men and 11-13mm for women. Maybe the pouty duck lips are just temporary until the philtrum somehow shortens? Do you think it is possible that Mewing shortens the philtrum length?

ReplyQuote
Topic starter Posted : 11/02/2018 3:25 pm
Sclera liked
Sclera
Estimable Member

Yes, I'm still thinking that the pouting lips has more to do with musculature than bone, at least in my case. I'm sure for some the teeth and jaw do impact this. When I hard-mew for any length of time, it feels like there's an air pocket between my teeth and lips, and when I relax those muscles, my lips return to the previous sensation. It feels so severe in change, but when I look in the mirror I can hardly tell. My upper lip looks plumper, but not abnormally so. My lower lip isn't sticking out in a "sad" pout. It definitely feels more like an even spread between both lips.

I actually think that a shortened philtrum will make fuller lips, as if it's "pulling" the lip up and exposing the top lip more. It just might be that with the forward maxilla and an expanded palate, the way the muscles rest on the skull make it less of a pout and more of just a natural state. That said, those observations are from cosmetic surgery results, and I don't have any information on statistics of natural philtrum length vs. plumpness of lips.

If that does happen -- that the philtrum shortens, thus making the top lip more plump without the pout, I would welcome it! I've ordered a caliper and will be doing detailed measurements (The ramus length on my right side is longer than my left, which I believe explains my canted smile). I'll add philtrum length to the list.

And in regards to the gummy smile, I'm very curious about this, myself. My smile has the proper gum-line ratio, despite the asymmetry. After some cranio-sacral massage, my muscles relaxed and evened out ever so slightly, making the lip line straighter during smiling, but exposing more of the gum-line to my right side. Everything I experience just reinforces that progress involves the entire body, not just spot treatment.

ReplyQuote
Posted : 11/02/2018 4:01 pm
Apollo liked
Apollo
Reputable Member

Tori and exostoses are both benign bony outgrowths of unknown etiology. When they are on the lingual side of the mouth they are called tori, when they are on the buccal side of the mouth they are called exostoses. I have been discussing my torus palatinus with @allixa, who worried that these growths might represent a fusing of the midpalatal suture preventing expansion (  https://the-great-work.org/community/main-forum/you-can-easily-shave-down-a-palate-expander-to-refit-it-to-your-mouth/#post-628 ), and @silver who reported progress in reducing the torus and expanding the palate (  https://the-great-work.org/community/main-forum/as-my-face-has-improved-i-can-feel-and-see-that-my-torus-palatinus-has-decreased/ ). 

I also have minor buccal exostoses. It is suspected that these might result from the pressures of clenching or bruxism as an adaptive thickening of the jaw to stabilize the roots of the teeth. I also wonder if a narrowed palate might contribute, as the shelf of bone extends out closer to a physiologic width where the teeth should be positioned.

I mentioned earlier in this thread that I don't have any gingival exposure above my incisors or canines, but my gums are visible in the region of my bicuspids and molars when I smile. This makes my exostoses slightly visible like the person in the image below, especially on the right side of my mouth which is canted lower. 

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is JIOH-7-62-g001.jpg

Sometimes these masses can become so enlarged that they visibly protrude on the external surface of the cheeks, but mine are nowhere near that pronounced. I wonder if palate expansion and/or extraoral protraction will have any effect on exostoses like the preliminary report from @silver of a reduction in the torus palatinus.

ReplyQuote
Topic starter Posted : 12/02/2018 4:44 pm
Apollo
Reputable Member

The transverse dimension of both Daisy Ridley and John Boyega's smiles are impressive, with minimal buccal corridors, and we could infer that they both have wider intermolar widths than the average adult. However, Boyega's smile arc is relatively flat. In other words the edges of his upper front teeth are relatively linear rather than following the contour of his lower lip. Whereas Ridley's anterior maxillary teeth are more consonant with that curvature (although their incisal edges are obscured by the lower lip in many photos) and the modest display of her gingival margins gives a youthful appearance. While not ideal, her facial form is very appealing to me, but I've seen some people describe her smile as horsey. I think of a horse smile as involving more gingival exposure. To be fair, her spontaneous smiles (when laughing, etc.) often display more of her gums and I think this is a result of the forward development of her maxilla. I've also seen her smile compared to Keira Knightley.

Knightley's incisal line/smile arc is distinct because her lateral incisors step up higher than her canines. This gives her smile a kind of quirky, capricious quality that I think is different than Ridley's. However, both have broad smiles with forward anterior positioning of the maxilla resulting in minimal buccal cooridors. I read an article (  http://www.sarvercourses.com/Portals/0/pdfs/SmileArcADJO.pdf ) that suggests smiles can be too broad: "It is well documented in the prosthodontic literature that one characteristic of an unrealistic or contrived smile—a 'denture smile'—is the lack of buccal corridors." The article implies that orthodontists should practice restraint in expansion to avoid this denture-like appearance. Perhaps this is what is causing some critics to have a negative response to Ridley and Knightley's smiles.

I mentioned before that my smile arc is pretty linear (like Boyega's but not as broad), and that I have gingival exposure above my molars and bicuspids but not above my front teeth. I think part of this might be corrected by shifting my maxilla forward and raising up the posterior portion, but I also suspect that I might need to use clear aligners or some other form of orthodontics to extrude my front teeth once I have achieved the desired skeletal adjustments.

ReplyQuote
Topic starter Posted : 16/03/2018 4:34 pm
Apollo
Reputable Member

I've seen a lot of discussion online about Tom Cruise's deviated dental midline. Looking closely, you can find a number of other facial asymmetries. His occlusal plane looks to be canted just slightly higher on the left. The bridge of his nose seems to be shifted slightly left of his interpupillary midline, and his nasolabial fold joins with his dimple on only the left side. It is clear from the alignment of his teeth in an early film, The Outsiders, that he has had orthodontic work done.

 

I have a number of asymmetries similar to Cruise's. However, while Cruise's dental midline and the bridge of his nose deviate from his interpupillary midline in the same direction, camouflaging the discrepancy, my nose and teeth deviate in opposite directions making it more obvious. My dental midline is probably less deviated than Cruise's (especially since correcting my oral posture), but the bridge of my nose and my occlusal cant are more deviated.

The main thing I want to analyze are his asymmetric nasolabial folds. Because nasolabial folds are correlated with aging, there have been several posts on the forum worried that chewing exercises or even mewing itself might make nasolabial folds more pronounced (often citing Dr. Mew's nasolabial folds as evidence) and others suggesting open-mouth chewing as a way to avoid exacerbating nasolabial folds. I don't have enough experience to offer an informed opinion on this dispute. However, I wonder if the asymmetry of Cruise's nasolabial folds could be instructive. Do you think the asymmetry comes from the underlying asymmetric skeletal structure (as seen in his midline deviation), or do you think the asymmetry comes from asymmetric development of facial muscles (or a combination of both)? Like Cruise, I have one nasolabial fold that veers out and meets up with the crease from my chin to the hollow of my cheek while the other remains a separate line. I wonder, if I have any success correcting my skeletal asymmetries, if the asymmetry in my nasolabial folds will also change. Cruise has other qualities in his favor that I don't have, including masseter development, a smile arc relatively consonant with the curve of his lower lip, minimal buccal corridors, and good forward maxilla development seen on profile photos.

ReplyQuote
Topic starter Posted : 17/03/2018 3:43 pm
Apollo
Reputable Member

I have been trying to nail down how the lip line relates to the skeletal maxillary height. I mentioned in the first post of this thread how it seems logical that vertical maxillary excess would be associated with gingival display. I asked in the most recent Q/A for Dr. Mew if someone with a low lip line, displaying no gingiva and less than 3/4 of the tooth height anteriorly, should focus on shifting the maxilla forward rather than up. Hopefully that question will be selected for the video, but I've continued to research, and this article is instructive:

https://www.jco-online.com/media/19911/jco_2005-03-155.pdf

The lip line is the amount of vertical tooth exposure in smiling--in other words, the height of the upper lip relative to the maxillary central incisors. As a general guideline, the lip line is optimal when the upper lip reaches the gingival margin, displaying the total cervicoincisal length of the maxillary central incisors, along with the interproximal gingivae. A high lip line exposes all of the clinical crowns plus a contiguous band of gingival tissue, whereas a low lip line displays less than 75% of the maxillary anterior teeth. Because female lip lines are an average 1.5mm higher than male lip lines, 1-2mm of gingival display at maximum smile could be considered normal for females.

Basically, the article says that skeletal maxillary height is just one of many factors determining the position of the lip line. Here is a picture of a man with skeletal vertical maxillary deficiency whose lip line covers most of his anterior teeth while smiling.

Another obvious factor that I mentioned above is the length of the upper lip or philtrum length.

Posted by: Apollo

The philtrum is the notch between the nose and upper lip, so measuring the philtrum reflects the length of the upper lip. My philtrum looks to be about 19mm long. I can't find a primary source, but sketchy internet sites claim that the ideal aesthetic philtrum length is 13-15mm for men and 11-13mm for women. Maybe the pouty duck lips are just temporary until the philtrum somehow shortens? Do you think it is possible that Mewing shortens the philtrum length?

Rather than just measuring the philtrum (stopping at the cupid's bow), this article reports the length of the entire upper lip to the tubercle including the vermillion, "from subnasale to the most inferior portion of the upper lip at the midline."  

They claim the average is about 23mm for adult males and 20mm for adult females. My upper lip length is about 25mm and my philtrum length is about 19mm. Since my upper lip is longer than average this might explain why more of my front teeth are covered by my lip when smiling. However, "a short upper lip is not always associated with a high lip line; on the contrary, the upper lip was found to be longer in a gingival-display group than in a non-displaying sample."

Another factor, which I haven't discussed previously, is "lip elevation." This compares the length of the upper lip at rest to the length of the upper lip when smiling. The lip lifts on average 7-8mm when smiling. My lip lifts about 7mm from 25mm to about 18mm, so this is within the normal range. A "hypermobile lip" with above average lip elevation can contribute to excess gingival display.

The tilting of the upper incisors can also influence the lip line. Proclined maxillary incisors (tilted forward) tend to reduce the incisor display and upright or retroclined (tilted backward) maxillary incisors tend to increase incisor display. My incisors are upright, so this wouldn't account for my low lip line.

The article also mentions the specific case of deep bites where the upper incisors excessively overlap the lower incisors, and open bites where the upper incisors don't make contact with the lower incisors. If anything, I might have a very slight deep bite which would result in more of the upper incisors being visible when smiling and less of the lower incisors. 

So with all of these factors, I think the only two that might be relevant to my case are my upper lip length and my skeletal maxillary height. I wonder if open mouth chewing has any impact on upper lip length if you are strengthening the muscles that lift the upper lip. Besides my upper lip being about 2mm longer than average, I think I can conclude that I don't want to further reduce my skeletal maxillary height in the front where it would hide more of my upper incisors. I've mentioned before that I have some gingival exposure in the back above my molars and bicuspids. For the past couple weeks I have only been pulling forward on the anterior attachment points of my headgear. I am still pulling up on the posterior attachment points. I also mentioned in a previous post the idea that I might need to extrude my maxillary incisors using clear aligners or other orthodontics after I achieve my desired skeletal changes. I think this research confirms that idea. This would also make my flat smile arch more consonant with the curve of my lower lip.

On a final note, the article suggests that the optimal lip line is a little higher in women than men. In women, a narrow band of gingiva above the maxillary incisors is considered normal. In men the optimal lip line just reaches the gingival margin displaying all of the teeth and the little wedges of gums between them. based on the male standard, my lip line is about 5mm too low in relation to my maxillary central incisors. For example. Angelina Jolie has some minor gingival display above her incisors, while Brad Pitt displays almost the entire height of his teeth but none of his gingiva. 

 

 

ReplyQuote
Topic starter Posted : 23/03/2018 8:47 pm
Meltcel
 Meltcel
Guest

I have a deep bite caused by orthodontics plus a down swung maxilla . for me I need rotation more than anything else. My maxilla seems deep it just isn't positioned correctly. As a result my chin points down and my smile has gum exposure .

Something like this guy 

I think rotation counterclockwise would benefit that guy the most. Of course palate widening too.

 

So hard to figure what route to take with this face morphing stuff.

 

ReplyQuote
Posted : 24/03/2018 2:38 am
alfio and Apollo liked
Apollo
Reputable Member

I've been talking about my flat smile arc. It turns out this is a frequent side effect of braces. If the brackets aren't placed right, the wire of the braces can intrude the incisors so that they line up with the canines making the front of the smile flat rather than following the curved contour of the lower lip. I looked back at the before and after pictures from my adolescent orthodontics and sure enough, my central incisors appear to be one or two millimeters higher in relation to my canines than they started. This could be part of the reason for my low lip line that leaves more than a quarter of my central incisors covered by my upper lip when I smile.

I think another factor that determines lip line which the article didn't discuss is the forward development of the maxilla. The article talked about the vertical maxillary dimension, but it didn't talk about forward growth. I've mentioned this idea earlier in this thread but it bears repeating.

Posted by: Apollo

moving the maxilla forward fills out that soft tissue in the horizontal direction so that there is less of it to drape down in the vertical direction. 

 So if I am able to shift my maxilla forward, it should display more of my incisors when I smile.

ReplyQuote
Topic starter Posted : 25/03/2018 4:17 pm
Silver
Trusted Member
Posted by: Apollo

moving the maxilla forward fills out that soft tissue in the horizontal direction so that there is less of it to drape down in the vertical direction. 

 So if I am able to shift my maxilla forward, it should display more of my incisors when I smile.

So a gummier smile is sign of improvement?

ReplyQuote
Posted : 26/03/2018 2:39 am
Apollo
Reputable Member
Posted by: Silver

So a gummier smile is sign of improvement?

Shifting the maxilla forward would display more of the incisors or gingiva, but shifting the maxilla upward would display less. As I mentioned, there are a number of other factors that also affect the level of the lip line, including tilting the incisors forward or backward, shortening the lip, raising the lip higher when smiling, or an open or closed bite.

ReplyQuote
Topic starter Posted : 26/03/2018 11:36 am
Apollo
Reputable Member
Posted by: Apollo

I wonder if open mouth chewing has any impact on upper lip length if you are strengthening the muscles that lift the upper lip.

I wrote this a couple days ago while musing about why my lip line is a little low (covering more than 1/4 of my upper central incisors when I smile). I've concluded that my adolescent braces likely flattened my smile arc, and that I could use clear aligners later in the course of my treatment to extrude the incisors. It has also occurred to me that any success shifting the maxilla forward would also display more of my incisors. However, this doesn't change that my lip length is 2mm longer than the average reported in the study, and reducing that would also improve my incisor display. I try to remember to keep my mouth open during chewing exercises now. Might increasing the resting tone of the muscles responsible for lifting the upper lip result in a shorter length of the upper lip at rest? 

I found an old post from @greensmoothies about this topic:

Posted by: Greensmoothies

I plan to start chewing and had planned to do open-mouth chewing as I read on another forum that this might help with reducing philtrum length. It makes sense because the movement of open-mouth chewing seems quite similar to a face exercise I do that's intended to reduce philtrum length. Just curious, would you say this open-mouth chewing has had a poor effect on the nasal labial folds? And did it perhaps help with philtrum length? I get that everyone is different but have some goals in mind and hope to get some more thoughts on this open-mouth chewing and the results others have gotten (especially concerning philtrum length and possible effect on the nasal labial folds).

 I've seen some speculation that closed mouth chewing makes nasolabial folds more prominent and that open mouth chewing could prevent this.

Posted by: Apollo
there have been several posts on the forum worried that chewing exercises or even mewing itself might make nasolabial folds more pronounced (often citing Dr. Mew's nasolabial folds as evidence) and others suggesting open-mouth chewing as a way to avoid exacerbating nasolabial folds. I don't have enough experience to offer an informed opinion on this dispute. 

I have done some addition research that suggests one of the muscles that raises the upper lip, the levator labii superioris, is responsible for deepening the nasolabial folds. This might contradict the notion that open mouth chewing is better for minimizing nasolabial folds.

Posted by: Greensmoothies
Lips are entirely relaxed.

 Maybe this is the key. Regardless, I am going to continue experimenting with open mouth chewing since I like the muscle activation sensations it produces and many contributors have reported positive effects from it. I am curious to hear more about the exercise @greensmoothies mentioned for reducing philtrum length!

 

ReplyQuote
Topic starter Posted : 26/03/2018 5:38 pm
Greensmoothies
Estimable Member
Posted by: Apollo

I am curious to hear more about the exercise @greensmoothies mentioned for reducing philtrum length!

On second thought, I'm not sure if it reduces philtrum length per se, but it does help increase cupid's bow curvature (not sure if this is correct terminology, I mean that there's a curve to the upper lip that can clearly be seen looking at a person's profile: young people and models tend to have this feature), and increases volume of the upper lip, which for me as a woman is an aesthetic result I can appreciate and at least helps give an illusion of a reduced philtrum length. My lower lip also tends to be bigger, so increase of upper volume helps getting closer to 1:1, also OMCing seems to be helping here. I think that yes, keeping the lips soft/relaxed helps during OMCing, it seems to be helping me and this is what my husband does when OMCing (his lips are 1:1 sized).

Anyway here's a couple exercises that I know that help this area of the face. Keep in mind they both seem to have the potential for worsening the nasal labial folds. With that said, I haven't gotten this effect myself, but I've seen a few reports reading my skin forums where people discuss facial exercise that this can indeed occur.

Exercise 1: Pinch skin around cupid's bow on both sides with thumb and fingers, then use the muscle to elevate this area, repeat x20
Exercise 2: Place fingers above upper lip, then use muscle to elevate this area, repeat x20

If my explanation is lacking then these are from a facial exercise program called Ageless if you dare. I think it's a good program, short and sweet too.

I've been doing face exercise on and off the past 5 years, and my experience is if you get an undesirable effect from any exercise, back off doing them and in a few days or so things return to normal. I've currently taken a step back from them and only doing some massage because I really want to see exactly what Mewing is doing, and I don't have skin laxity issues eg jowls which is what building muscles in the face helps with (surely chewing helps here).

Remember this pain... and let it activate you.

ReplyQuote
Posted : 26/03/2018 9:16 pm
Apollo liked
Apollo
Reputable Member
Posted by: Greensmoothies
Posted by: Apollo

I am curious to hear more about the exercise @greensmoothies mentioned for reducing philtrum length!

On second thought, I'm not sure if it reduces philtrum length per se, but it does help increase cupid's bow curvature (not sure if this is correct terminology, I mean that there's a curve to the upper lip that can clearly be seen looking at a person's profile: young people and models tend to have this feature), and increases volume of the upper lip, which for me as a woman is an aesthetic result I can appreciate and at least helps give an illusion of a reduced philtrum length. My lower lip also tends to be bigger, so increase of upper volume helps getting closer to 1:1, also OMCing seems to be helping here. I think that yes, keeping the lips soft/relaxed helps during OMCing, it seems to be helping me and this is what my husband does when OMCing (his lips are 1:1 sized).

Anyway here's a couple exercises that I know that help this area of the face. Keep in mind they both seem to have the potential for worsening the nasal labial folds. With that said, I haven't gotten this effect myself, but I've seen a few reports reading my skin forums where people discuss facial exercise that this can indeed occur.

Exercise 1: Pinch skin around cupid's bow on both sides with thumb and fingers, then use the muscle to elevate this area, repeat x20
Exercise 2: Place fingers above upper lip, then use muscle to elevate this area, repeat x20

If my explanation is lacking then these are from a facial exercise program called Ageless if you dare. I think it's a good program, short and sweet too.

I've been doing face exercise on and off the past 5 years, and my experience is if you get an undesirable effect from any exercise, back off doing them and in a few days or so things return to normal. I've currently taken a step back from them and only doing some massage because I really want to see exactly what Mewing is doing, and I don't have skin laxity issues eg jowls which is what building muscles in the face helps with (surely chewing helps here).

Thanks! Exercise 1 might be increasing the width of the vermillion of the upper lip, reducing the philtrum length but not the overall upper lip length. Exercise 2 sounds similar to what we discussed above with activating the muscles that raise the upper lip, but this adds some resistance to the motion. I'll consider incorporating exercise 2 into my routine if I start concentrating on raising my lip line.

ReplyQuote
Topic starter Posted : 27/03/2018 3:58 pm
Apollo
Reputable Member

I have been straining to find more precise language to describe the misalignment of my maxilla. I have an occlusal cant that makes my left side higher than my right side. I also have more gingival display in the back than the front so I think my anterior maxilla is higher than my posterior maxilla. I also think that my left side is slightly more forward than my right side. What terms should I use to describe all 3 dimensions of my asymmetry? Originally, I was thinking of it like tire alignment when they tell you how many degrees off your camber, caster, and toe are.

Well, it turns out I was on the right track with my transportation metaphor, but the correct terminology is roll (rotation around x-axis), pitch (rotation around y-axis), and yaw (rotation around z-axis).

 

The same terms can be used to describe movements of the whole human head:

Or in maxiofacial surgery, they use this terminology to describe realigning just a section of the maxilla:

So when we talk about an occlusal cant, we are describing the "roll" of the maxilla around the x-axis. In threads that have talked about the rotational component of facepulling, we are referring to the "pitch" of the maxilla around the y-axis. And if one side is more forward than the other, we are describing the "yaw" of the maxilla around the z-axis.

ReplyQuote
Topic starter Posted : 15/04/2018 4:05 pm
EddieMoney
Reputable Member
Posted by: Greensmoothies
Posted by: Apollo

I am curious to hear more about the exercise @greensmoothies mentioned for reducing philtrum length!

On second thought, I'm not sure if it reduces philtrum length per se, but it does help increase cupid's bow curvature (not sure if this is correct terminology, I mean that there's a curve to the upper lip that can clearly be seen looking at a person's profile: young people and models tend to have this feature), and increases volume of the upper lip, which for me as a woman is an aesthetic result I can appreciate and at least helps give an illusion of a reduced philtrum length. My lower lip also tends to be bigger, so increase of upper volume helps getting closer to 1:1, also OMCing seems to be helping here. I think that yes, keeping the lips soft/relaxed helps during OMCing, it seems to be helping me and this is what my husband does when OMCing (his lips are 1:1 sized).

Anyway here's a couple exercises that I know that help this area of the face. Keep in mind they both seem to have the potential for worsening the nasal labial folds. With that said, I haven't gotten this effect myself, but I've seen a few reports reading my skin forums where people discuss facial exercise that this can indeed occur.

Exercise 1: Pinch skin around cupid's bow on both sides with thumb and fingers, then use the muscle to elevate this area, repeat x20
Exercise 2: Place fingers above upper lip, then use muscle to elevate this area, repeat x20

If my explanation is lacking then these are from a facial exercise program called Ageless if you dare. I think it's a good program, short and sweet too.

I've been doing face exercise on and off the past 5 years, and my experience is if you get an undesirable effect from any exercise, back off doing them and in a few days or so things return to normal. I've currently taken a step back from them and only doing some massage because I really want to see exactly what Mewing is doing, and I don't have skin laxity issues eg jowls which is what building muscles in the face helps with (surely chewing helps here).

Key words in one of your sentences is "as a woman". I can absolutely understand why a woman would want to shorten her philtrum and have a curved upper lip.

As a man however this would look too neotenous and would expose more gum in my smile. Thus it would make me look less masculine. 

For this and other reasons I opt out of OMC. However I must mention that when I chew , I take small bites so my lips maintain a seal through suction rather than through forcing them closed. Maybe the size of bites we take also has to factor into play

ReplyQuote
Posted : 15/04/2018 5:03 pm
Mewssolini
New Member

I think OMC is good for disabling the buccinator during swallowing and forcing the tongue to move food around. By OMC i mean chewing without lips in contact, and without "swirling".

 Image result for chewing gif

 

Buccinator:

Insertion

in the fibers of the orbicularis oris

 

It wold be hard to activate this muscle if the lips are relaxed (not in an isometric position) , so I think it also teaches proper swallowing.

 

ReplyQuote
Posted : 15/04/2018 5:33 pm
Greensmoothies
Estimable Member
Posted by: EddieMoney
Posted by: Greensmoothies
Posted by: Apollo

I am curious to hear more about the exercise @greensmoothies mentioned for reducing philtrum length!

On second thought, I'm not sure if it reduces philtrum length per se, but it does help increase cupid's bow curvature (not sure if this is correct terminology, I mean that there's a curve to the upper lip that can clearly be seen looking at a person's profile: young people and models tend to have this feature), and increases volume of the upper lip, which for me as a woman is an aesthetic result I can appreciate and at least helps give an illusion of a reduced philtrum length. My lower lip also tends to be bigger, so increase of upper volume helps getting closer to 1:1, also OMCing seems to be helping here. I think that yes, keeping the lips soft/relaxed helps during OMCing, it seems to be helping me and this is what my husband does when OMCing (his lips are 1:1 sized).

Anyway here's a couple exercises that I know that help this area of the face. Keep in mind they both seem to have the potential for worsening the nasal labial folds. With that said, I haven't gotten this effect myself, but I've seen a few reports reading my skin forums where people discuss facial exercise that this can indeed occur.

Exercise 1: Pinch skin around cupid's bow on both sides with thumb and fingers, then use the muscle to elevate this area, repeat x20
Exercise 2: Place fingers above upper lip, then use muscle to elevate this area, repeat x20

If my explanation is lacking then these are from a facial exercise program called Ageless if you dare. I think it's a good program, short and sweet too.

I've been doing face exercise on and off the past 5 years, and my experience is if you get an undesirable effect from any exercise, back off doing them and in a few days or so things return to normal. I've currently taken a step back from them and only doing some massage because I really want to see exactly what Mewing is doing, and I don't have skin laxity issues eg jowls which is what building muscles in the face helps with (surely chewing helps here).

Key words in one of your sentences is "as a woman". I can absolutely understand why a woman would want to shorten her philtrum and have a curved upper lip.

As a man however this would look too neotenous and would expose more gum in my smile. Thus it would make me look less masculine. 

For this and other reasons I opt out of OMC. However I must mention that when I chew , I take small bites so my lips maintain a seal through suction rather than through forcing them closed. Maybe the size of bites we take also has to factor into play

You misunderstand, that's what the facial exercises intend to do (shorter philtrum, upper lip curvature) but we don't yet know if OMCing will promote upper lip curvature. And it's hard to say for sure what to attribute this to, but since beginning to OMC my maxilla has upswung a little which improved my mid face appearance including a more attractive philtrum area. As for OMCing, I've got access to an example of the effects of OMCing with my husband, as he's been doing it all his life. He has an excellent maxilla to go along with a "male model" appearance to his face (by which I basically mean the ideal forward growth, well-supported eye area, "Hollywood smile" and robust jaw). He has no gummy smile (and neither do I despite doing those exercises 5 years until more recently, having now ceased this practice to help me better determine the effects of mewing and chewing) and while his philtrum is short, I think if it's neotenous or not is irrelevant as it's typical for men to have some neotenous facial traits without necessarily negatively impacting facial attractiveness, which I believe is the case here. That said, there probably are good reasons for not doing it. One reason off the top of my head, it may encourage mouth breathing at the time of chewing. Would be interested to hear your other reasons. Agreed on smaller bites, I think it's important toward keeping lips as relaxed as possible.

Remember this pain... and let it activate you.

ReplyQuote
Posted : 15/04/2018 6:12 pm
EddieMoney
Reputable Member

Closed mouth chewing has not reduced the size of my lips, by the way. It has merely repositioned them so they don't pout, which is the ideal for a male profile. Pouty lips are not really an ideal male trait. Male models have full lips, not pouty ones. Most pretty boy soccer players have full lips, not pouty ones. Pouty lips on men are not that common if non existing altogether. The only reason mine pout is because orthodontics narrowed my palates thus causing my mandible to sit back further like that of a feminine skull. When the mandible comes back the lower lip sits on the upper teeth and this causes a pout. 

Note I am not saying full lips are bad on men. Duck lips are as they create a weird androgynous and unnatural look. This is why even male model pretty boys like Jordan Barrett (who looks realistically as androgynous as male models can be) doesn't even have an unnatural pout and his are some of the poutiest lips to the point people have called him a ladyboy

ReplyQuote
Posted : 15/04/2018 7:09 pm
Apollo
Reputable Member
Posted by: EddieMoney
 
As a man however this would look too neotenous and would expose more gum in my smile. Thus it would make me look less masculine. 

@eddiemoney, you've made abundantly clear that you are not a proponent of open-mouth chewing. It was brought up in this thread in the context of correcting a low lip line that reduces incisal display, so when you say that it might increase gingival exposure, this is exactly the result I am hoping for. I mentioned the sexual dimorphism of the lip line earlier in the thread:

Posted by: Apollo

In women, a narrow band of gingiva above the maxillary incisors is considered normal. In men the optimal lip line just reaches the gingival margin displaying all of the teeth and the little wedges of gums between them. based on the male standard, my lip line is about 5mm too low in relation to my maxillary central incisors. For example. Angelina Jolie has some minor gingival display above her incisors, while Brad Pitt displays almost the entire height of his teeth but none of his gingiva. 

Posted by: Apollo
the modest display of her gingival margins gives a youthful appearance.

Maybe you could write up a post that goes into more details about gender differences since it seems like something you are well versed in. I feel like many of the features that you are describing as feminine or juvenile are still desirable in men, just not to the same degree as women. craniofacial dystophy correlates with an aged appearance, so we are all trying to look younger, it's just a matter of how much. A negative canthal tilt for example is less desirable in both women and men, but a neutral to slightly positive canthal tilt looks more masculine whereas a more conspicuously positive canthal tilt looks femanine. So to say that a man who starts with a negative canthal tilt should try to avoid making it more positive because it is "femanine" or "neotenous" fails to recognize where he is starting from. In the same way, gingival display is a femanine or youthful trait, but a man who is starting out with a lip line that covers more than a quarter of his incisors when he smiles could raise his lip line without looking effeminate.

I don't think there is much risk that open-mouth chewing could cause bimax because my tongue is moving around the bolus of gum or food and isn't pressing forward on the incisors, so removing the check of the lip pressure doesn't disrupt the dental balance zone. 

Posted by: Greensmoothies
it may encourage mouth breathing at the time of chewing.
I think I am still breathing through my nose while chewing with my lips parted. In practice, I think I switch back and forth between open and closed mouth chewing throughout a session or meal. It's not something I am fanatical about.
ReplyQuote
Topic starter Posted : 15/04/2018 8:29 pm
EddieMoney
Reputable Member
Posted by: Apollo
Posted by: EddieMoney
 
As a man however this would look too neotenous and would expose more gum in my smile. Thus it would make me look less masculine. 

@eddiemoney, you've made abundantly clear that you are not a proponent of open-mouth chewing. It was brought up in this thread in the context of correcting a low lip line that reduces incisal display, so when you say that it might increase gingival exposure, this is exactly the result I am hoping for. I mentioned the sexual dimorphism of the lip line earlier in the thread:

Posted by: Apollo

In women, a narrow band of gingiva above the maxillary incisors is considered normal. In men the optimal lip line just reaches the gingival margin displaying all of the teeth and the little wedges of gums between them. based on the male standard, my lip line is about 5mm too low in relation to my maxillary central incisors. For example. Angelina Jolie has some minor gingival display above her incisors, while Brad Pitt displays almost the entire height of his teeth but none of his gingiva. 

Posted by: Apollo
the modest display of her gingival margins gives a youthful appearance.

Maybe you could write up a post that goes into more details about gender differences since it seems like something you are well versed in. I feel like many of the features that you are describing as feminine or juvenile are still desirable in men, just not to the same degree as women. craniofacial dystophy correlates with an aged appearance, so we are all trying to look younger, it's just a matter of how much. A negative canthal tilt for example is less desirable in both women and men, but a neutral to slightly positive canthal tilt looks more masculine whereas a more conspicuously positive canthal tilt looks femanine. So to say that a man who starts with a negative canthal tilt should try to avoid making it more positive because it is "femanine" or "neotenous" fails to recognize where he is starting from. In the same way, gingival display is a femanine or youthful trait, but a man who is starting out with a lip line that covers more than a quarter of his incisors when he smiles could raise his lip line without looking effeminate.

I don't think there is much risk that open-mouth chewing could cause bimax because my tongue is moving around the bolus of gum or food and isn't pressing forward on the incisors, so removing the check of the lip pressure doesn't disrupt the dental balance zone. 

Posted by: Greensmoothies
it may encourage mouth breathing at the time of chewing.
I think I am still breathing through my nose while chewing with my lips parted. In practice, I think I switch back and forth between open and closed mouth chewing throughout a session or meal. It's not something I am fanatical about.

That's fair. My thing is i have too much gum exposure at the moment and aim for a more Brad Pitt style smile vs Angelina Jolie (the latter of which orthodontics gave me). 

I agree looking younger is something many aspire to as a recessed maxilla essentially correlates with aging. I get that. For me I am just not understanding the reasoning behind OMC thus far so I will avoid it. It also seems that the people who perform OMC want results that I cannot relate to. For me, orthodontics really feminized my face by making both of my palates narrow, pushing my mandible back (thus decreasing lower third height), and making my lips pout unnaturally to a level I haven't seen in most men. So, knowing that this effect is actually not a natural part of my genetics and was in fact manmade, I seek to go back to the way I should be.

Also, I do feel dimorphism is something that should be discussed in terms of aesthetics. As people want to look like better versions of themselves, I find it pertinent that people understand that certain features they have are not CFD (like a man with a sloping forehead has no CFD but is just normal). And also, just because something looks aesthetic on one sex doesn't mean it makes sense on another. I remember back during the early days of people discovering ways to improve their looks that long philtrums were vilified as some unaesthetic quality. Then people learned it has nothing to do with philtrums length but more about the ratio. I definitely don't want inaccurate and outdated info to cloud people's judgment.

For now here are some facts on sexual dimorphism in terms of facial development:

Men have longer philtrums (thus less gum exposure)

Men have wider palates on average (thus wider lips and thinner lips for that matter since pout is reduced due to mandibular projection)

Smaller gonial angles are masculine. Larger gonial angles feminine

Sloping foreheads are masculine. Flat foreheads are feminine.

Deep set eyes are not a dimorphic trait

A taller lower third is masculine due to a longer ramus and wider palate that allows the mandible to jut more. A shorter lower third is feminine for the exact opposite reason

Males tend to more concave lip profiles, females more convex 

Males have square chins, females pointy and triangular

Females have larger eyes proportionally compared to males

Females have more forehead prominence (gracile) while males have more jaw prominence (robust)

Now I will say some people will have opposite sex characteristics which are genetic. For example I was born with full lips and so was everyone in my family. This is a naturally feminine feature I cannot change unless I get surgery. So I don't expect mewing to rid me of my full lips, just to position them properly which has been happening and it has made me very happy. Also, some things like actual nose SHAPE (not length or curve) cannot be changed as nose shape is something that is determined genetically which in turn is affected by climate (nose shape determines how air is cooled or warmed efore it enters the body). Those things are entirely genetic and cannot be changed the same  way a West African cannot really expect to have the side profile of someone from the Mediterranean  

ReplyQuote
Posted : 16/04/2018 12:46 am
Meowxilla, Autokrator, Sceriff and 1 people liked
Apollo
Reputable Member
Posted by: Apollo

Tori and exostoses are both benign bony outgrowths of unknown etiology. When they are on the lingual side of the mouth they are called tori, when they are on the buccal side of the mouth they are called exostoses. I have been discussing my torus palatinus with @allixa, who worried that these growths might represent a fusing of the midpalatal suture preventing expansion (  https://the-great-work.org/community/main-forum/you-can-easily-shave-down-a-palate-expander-to-refit-it-to-your-mouth/#post-628 ), and @silver who reported progress in reducing the torus and expanding the palate (  https://the-great-work.org/community/main-forum/as-my-face-has-improved-i-can-feel-and-see-that-my-torus-palatinus-has-decreased/ ). 

 

Interestingly, a Weston A. Price Foundation article that has been shared previously on this forum (  https://www.westonaprice.org/health-topics/dentistry/is-it-mental-or-is-it-dental/ ) relates palatal tori to nasal septal deviation:

It is an important fact that the soft tissues develop to their genetic size, even when the bones do not! You might think of the head as a box that must house all of the structures that the genetic code needs to express and that will develop, but lack of proper dimensions to the cranial bones and the cranial cavity causes overcrowding, overlapping or deviation of some soft tissue areas. This can be illustrated by the example of overpacking a suitcase.

An example of this “overpacked suitcase” in humans occurs in the nose. How often have you heard someone say, “I have a deviated septum”? The septum is the cartilaginous tissue membrane that separates the two nostrils vertically. Imagine this soft tissue developing to its normal size, but the maxilla remains under-developed. The developing septum has to express its dimension somewhere, so it has two choices—it either deviates or bends to one side or the other (the deviated septum) or it grows through the maxillary suture and creates the condition known as palatal tori. These are bumps or ridges in the middle of the palate and most people have them to some degree or another.

A deviated septum blocks proper nasal air flow causing the individual to take up mouth breathing most of the time. There are a variety of other soft and hard tissue conditions associated with the nasal cavity such as polyps, enlarged turbinates and muscosal conditions that also serve to restrict air flow.

A deviated septum or overgrowth of the soft tissue in the nose can cause blockage of the nostrils, leading to mouth breathing.

A deviated septum or overgrowth of the soft tissue in the nose can cause blockage of the nostrils, leading to mouth breathing.

As I've mentioned previously, the bridge of my nose is significantly deviated to the left, and looking up at my nostrils like the pictures from the article shows their discrepant sizes. The bridge of my nose seems to have straightened out a little with my palate expansion, but I don't think the size of my nostrils have changed much. I also haven't observed significant improvements in nasal breathing. I'm not sure how to interpret this, but my torus is bigger on the right side, and my right nostril is smaller. Expanding my intermolar width by 4mm doesn't seem to have significantly changed the appearance of my torus palatinus itself, but its prominence might be slightly reduced because the rest of the roof of my mouth might have flattened out a little closer to the level of the torus.

Posted by: Apollo

I think my torus palatinus looks about the same, but maybe the roof of my mouth around the torus has flattened out slightly closer to its level.

I've wondered what this means in terms of where the expansion of my intermolar width is coming from. For example, the torus doesn't seem to be noticably wider. I haven't opened up a diastema between my central incisors. Is separation of my midpalatal suture creating the majority of my expansion? I mentioned some of these questions early on, but I don't have many more answers now.

Posted by: Apollo

I'm curious as I separate the expander, if I am opening that midpalatal suture along the entire thickness  including the torus such that the torus would become wider, or if the suture begins to peel open at the top and the bone of the torus would kind of fill in the opening gap, reducing the prominence of the torus. My torus is less prominent than the one in the picture.

I speculate that maybe the superior side of my midpalatal suture (in the floor of my nasal cavity) is pulling apart and flattening the depressions along either side of the torus in the roof of my mouth, but the inferior side of the midpalatal suture has remained together.

ReplyQuote
Topic starter Posted : 17/05/2018 2:56 pm
Azrael
Estimable Member
Posted by: @eddiemoney

That's fair. My thing is i have too much gum exposure at the moment and aim for a more Brad Pitt style smile vs Angelina Jolie (the latter of which orthodontics gave me).

I too have a gummy smile as a result of orthodontics (and elastics) like you, so I am curious. Did you improve your smile on terms of gumminess? If so, how exactly? I am asking because it has been a while since you wrote this response above.

ReplyQuote
Posted : 19/02/2020 4:29 am
EddieMoney
Reputable Member
Posted by: @azrael
Posted by: @eddiemoney

That's fair. My thing is i have too much gum exposure at the moment and aim for a more Brad Pitt style smile vs Angelina Jolie (the latter of which orthodontics gave me).

I too have a gummy smile as a result of orthodontics (and elastics) like you, so I am curious. Did you improve your smile on terms of gumminess? If so, how exactly? I am asking because it has been a while since you wrote this response above.

Improved it a lot through pushing forward with my tongue. In fact it is barely gummy at all now

ReplyQuote
Posted : 19/02/2020 4:22 pm
Azrael
Estimable Member

@eddiemoney

That's amazing! Would you mind sharing your routine with me? How much gingivial exposure did you have? And how long did it take you to get to your current level?

Do you have a progress pic, btw?

ReplyQuote
Posted : 19/02/2020 5:08 pm
max iller
Eminent Member

@Apollo so we recommend suction to resolve torus palatinus, not pushing?

ReplyQuote
Posted : 21/02/2020 4:02 am
Apollo
Reputable Member
Posted by: @maxiller

@Apollo so we recommend suction to resolve torus palatinus, not pushing?

I doubt that either posture would improve a torus. Short of surgical reduction, I've speculated that maybe expansion-induced bone bending might level out the protrusion to some modest extent, but I'm skeptical if even that would reduce the actual thickness of the torus. Frankly, mine hasn't really changed appreciably.

ReplyQuote
Topic starter Posted : 21/02/2020 9:02 pm
Sceriff
Eminent Member

I read this thread with great interest, and I have a fairly pertinent question:

Do you think my eyes are the sign of craniofacial dystrophy or are they due to genetics? 

ReplyQuote
Posted : 22/02/2020 4:38 pm
Elwynn
Estimable Member

@scerif

I don't understand why you think there's anything wrong with your eyes. They look fine to me.

24 years old

ReplyQuote
Posted : 22/02/2020 4:56 pm
Sceriff liked
Sceriff
Eminent Member

Thank you for the answer but to me they seem tired and unexpressive. 

  1.  

 

ReplyQuote
Posted : 22/02/2020 5:37 pm
Agendum
Eminent Member

I think gummy smile where the front teeth make the face longer is because of narrow and recessed maxilla more than it is a problem with the palate.

The teeth and their roots have variable size to each person, those with larger teeth and longer roots need to displace them in a more downswung position to adapt to a narrow palate and maxilla. This can prevent the mandible (and its incisors) from reaching its correct position leading to a recessed mandible. This recession exaggerates the long face look.

Its more of the same crowding, but through skeletal displacement beyond dentoaveolar.

ReplyQuote
Posted : 27/02/2020 8:32 am
maxillary
Active Member

@scerif

In my opinion eyes can be affected to a great extent by the maxilla. The robustness of your eye bones can be genetic, along with their shape and a few other things.

This maxillofacial surgery describes what I'm talking about:

And this GIF even though I believe is not a demonstration of treatment or anything, but an unrelated illustration:

The orbital bones become more compact and provide more support to your eyes, this is through forward growth and correct positioning of the maxilla, aka no underbites nor deepbites, orthodontic work involved to recess your face further in means to achieve positive dental results often lead to the same outcome regardless. (Masking the core issue)

ReplyQuote
Posted : 01/03/2020 9:12 am
Lostrade
New Member

Hello, so much writing and technical terms to follow properly...So can someone tell what type of method to follow if we have little visibility of front teeth when smiling. My teeth are not as visible and only the front 6 or so teeth are more prominent unless I force a huge smile. My palate is not narrow but I have wide cheekbones. So my condition is kind of the opposite of gummy smile. In this case, which area should I focus when mewing/chewing, and what else should I do to make it better?

ReplyQuote
Posted : 02/03/2021 4:10 pm
aleksandr444200
Active Member
Posted by: @apollo

 

 

Or in maxiofacial surgery, they use this terminology to describe realigning just a section of the maxilla:

So when we talk about an occlusal cant, we are describing the "roll" of the maxilla around the x-axis. In threads that have talked about the rotational component of facepulling, we are referring to the "pitch" of the maxilla around the y-axis. And if one side is more forward than the other, we are describing the "yaw" of the maxilla around the z-axis.

Sorry to quote such an old post, but do we know how to fix a mis-aligned roll?

The left side of my teeth are lower down than the right.

ReplyQuote
Posted : 03/03/2021 3:57 am
Apollo
Reputable Member
Posted by: @lostrade

Hello, so much writing and technical terms to follow properly...So can someone tell what type of method to follow if we have little visibility of front teeth when smiling. My teeth are not as visible and only the front 6 or so teeth are more prominent unless I force a huge smile. My palate is not narrow but I have wide cheekbones. So my condition is kind of the opposite of gummy smile. In this case, which area should I focus when mewing/chewing, and what else should I do to make it better?

I also had a low lip line, reducing the display of my incisors when smiling. I wrote above about how this might seem like a vertical deficiency in the maxilla, but in my case is actually a forward deficiency. A retruded maxilla causes the upper lip to drape over more of the teeth and moving the maxilla forward reveals more of the teeth when smiling. I'd recommend getting a lateral cephalogram x-ray so you can measure how retruded your maxilla is and the inclination of your incisors. This should give you a better idea of what factors are causing your lip to cover your front teeth when smiling. I'm afraid I don't have good advice for how an adult could fix this through oral posture alone. I think I've gotten a couple millimeters of forward expansion from MSE+FM treatment and it seems to have slightly increased my incisal display without the risk of jaw surgery.

ReplyQuote
Topic starter Posted : 03/03/2021 12:45 pm
Apollo
Reputable Member
Posted by: @aleksandr444200

Sorry to quote such an old post, but do we know how to fix a mis-aligned roll?

The left side of my teeth are lower down than the right.

Orthodontists have several options for correcting occlusal cant by intruding the lower side and/or extruding the higher side. To some extent this is just dental camouflaging of the skeletal roll. I think my cant has gotten a little better during my MSE expansion and maybe this is actual skeletal realignment from mobilizing the perimaxillary sutures and releasing torsion of the skull bones.

ReplyQuote
Topic starter Posted : 03/03/2021 12:54 pm
Lostrade
New Member
Posted by: @apollo
Posted by: @lostrade

Hello, so much writing and technical terms to follow properly...So can someone tell what type of method to follow if we have little visibility of front teeth when smiling. My teeth are not as visible and only the front 6 or so teeth are more prominent unless I force a huge smile. My palate is not narrow but I have wide cheekbones. So my condition is kind of the opposite of gummy smile. In this case, which area should I focus when mewing/chewing, and what else should I do to make it better?

I also had a low lip line, reducing the display of my incisors when smiling. I wrote above about how this might seem like a vertical deficiency in the maxilla, but in my case is actually a forward deficiency. A retruded maxilla causes the upper lip to drape over more of the teeth and moving the maxilla forward reveals more of the teeth when smiling. I'd recommend getting a lateral cephalogram x-ray so you can measure how retruded your maxilla is and the inclination of your incisors. This should give you a better idea of what factors are causing your lip to cover your front teeth when smiling. I'm afraid I don't have good advice for how an adult could fix this through oral posture alone. I think I've gotten a couple millimeters of forward expansion from MSE+FM treatment and it seems to have slightly increased my incisal display without the risk of jaw surgery.

Thank you for your response. In my case, it is not so severe but still not perfect. I am thinking of focusing on chewing to make lower jaw bigger and slight forward movement and expansion of premolar area.

ReplyQuote
Posted : 04/03/2021 6:16 am