Truth Lies in the Depths: Novel Insights into Facial Aesthetic Measurements from a U.S. Survey Panel.

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Aesthetic facial bone surgery and facial implantology expand the boundaries of conventional facial surgery that focus on facial soft tissue. This study aimed to reveal novel aesthetic facial measurements to provide tailored treatment concepts and advance patient care. METHODS: A total of n=101 study participants (46 females and 55 males) were presented with 120 patient portraits (frontal images in natural head posture; 60 females and 60 males) and asked to assess the facial attractiveness (scale 0-10; "How attractive do you find the person in the image?") and the model capability score (MCS; scale 0-10; "How likely do you think the person in the image could pursue a modelling career?"). For each frontal photograph, defined facial measurements and ratios were taken to analyse their relationship with the perception of facial attractiveness and MCS. RESULTS: The overall attractiveness rating was 4.3 ± 1.1, while the mean MCS was 3.4 ± 1.1. In young males, there was a significant correlation between attractiveness and the zygoma-mandible angle (ZMA)2 (r= - 0.553; p= 0.011). In young and middle-aged females, MCS was significantly correlated with facial width (FW)1-FW2 ratio (r= 0.475; p= 0.034). For all male individuals, a ZMA1 value of 171.79 degrees (Y= 0.313; p= 0.024) was the most robust cut-off to determine facial attractiveness. The majority of human evaluators (n=62; 51.7%) considered facial implants a potential treatment to improve the patient's facial attractiveness. CONCLUSION: This study introduced novel metrics of facial attractiveness, focusing on the facial skeleton. Our findings emphasized the significance of zygomatic measurements and mandibular projections for facial aesthetics, with FI representing a promising surgical approach to optimize facial aesthetics. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV 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 .