Digital Analysis of Soft Tissue Nasal Anatomy for Individual Treatment Planning

Abstract views: 141 / PDF downloads: 104




aesthetic surgery, columella, facial aesthetics, facial analysis, nose


Objective: Changing contour lines of the external nose following traumatic, aesthetic and tumour surgeries have become very trendy. The goal of this research is to study the several soft tissue landmarks, measurements (linear distances, ratios, angles) of the external nose and its nasal indicis using a computer program.
Methods: Face region were taken a photographs of the two hundred adults. Analyses of linear (the lengths of nares, nasal bridge, and columella and nose height, nares width) and angular analyses (angles of nasofrontal, nasolabial and nasal tip) were computed and averaged for gender with age. As for the shape of the nose, it was categorized as subunits: nasal tip (sharp, normal, wide, protrusive and asymmetric), nasal base (normal, wide, asymmetric) nasal alae (normal, thick, thin, asymmetric), nares (normal, horizontal and asymmetric) and columella
(normal, wide, short and bifid) nasal base, nares, nasal alae, columella and classified subunit as normal, protrusive, sharp, asymmetric, and wide.
Results: The nose height have to 49.05 ± 3.48 mm in young male adults, 50.37 ± 2.33 mm in young female adults. Distance lengthwise the nasal bridge have to 48.60 ± 3.24 in males, 37.09 ± 5.49 females. The two mean measured nasal lengths were significantly greater in men. At the same time, angular measurements for nasolabial and interalar were higher in males. Nasal tip angle was 127.47 ± 82.9° in males, 75.8° in females. On average, young male adults had larger nasal linear distances such as nasal bridge length, nares lengths and nares widths relation of height than young female adults (p;<0.01); No gender differences were observed for columella widths and to nose height ratio (p;<0.01). The nasofrontal, nasal tip, nasolabial and interalar angles showed statistically significant differences among young male adults and young female adults (p;<0.05). The nasolabial angle exhibited
considerable variability. The shape details of nares was showed large variability. Nasal base, nasal tip and nasal alae shapes were similar, nares asymmetry was more frequently compared with other features.
Conclusions: The Anatolian people’s nose exhibits wide nasal tip, has a wider nasal base, and is more thicker at the alae, with wider definition of the columella. The significant gender differences of nasal shapes were found. The wide and sharp features of nasal tip were related to an important features in men, whereas asymmetric nares were dominant in young female adults. Using digitized reference details, this study helped define the best cosmetic surgery recreate the nose and increase the success of customized therapy. Also, our findings facial alteratios, facial reconstruction, personal identification, Trauma assessments may also have data banks based on age and gender.


Metrics Loading ...


Benslimane F, van Harpen L, Myers SR, et al. The Benslimane’s artistic model for females’ gaze beauty: An original assessment tool. Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2017; 41(1): 81-89.

Devcic Z, Rayikanti BA, Hevia JP, et al. Nasal tip projection and facial attractiveness. Laryngoscope. 2011; 121(7): 1388-1394.

Krane NA, Markey JD, Moneta LB, et al. Aesthetics of the nasal dorsum: proportions, light, and shadow. Facial Plast Surg. 2017; 33(2): 120-124.

Doddi NM, Eccles R. (2010) The role of anthropometric measurements in nasal surgery and research: a systematic review. Clin Otolaryngol 35(4):277-83.

Dong Y, Zhaao Y, Bai S, et al. Three-dimensional anthropometric analysis of the Chinese nose. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2010; 63(11): 1832-1839.

Liew S, Wu WT, Chan HH, et al. Consensus on changing trends, attitudes, and concepts of Asian beauty. Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2016; 40(2): 193-201.

Husein OF, Sepehr A, Garg R, et al. Anthropometric and aesthetic analysis of the Indian American woman’s face. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2010; 63(11): 1825-1831.

Kale-Varlk S. Angular photogrammetric analysis of the soft tissue facial profile of Anatolian Turkish adults. J Craniofac Surg. 2008; 19(6): 1481-1486.

Mehta N, Srivastava RK. The Indian nose: An anthropometric analysis. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2017; 70(10): 1472-1482.

Naini FB, Cobourne MT, Garagiola U, et al. Nasofrontal angle and nasal dorsal aesthetics: A quantitative investigation of idealized and normative values. Facial Plast Surg. 2016; 32(4): 44-51.

Hatch CD, Wehby GL, Nidey NL, et al. Effects of objective 3-dimensional measures of facial shape and symmetry on perceptions of facial attractiveness. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2017; 75(9).

Humphrey S, Beleznay K, Fitzgerald R. Combination therapy in midfacial rejuvenation. Dermatol Surg. 2016; 42 Suppl 2: S83-S88.

Loyo M, Wang TD. Revision rhinoplasty. Clin Plast Surg. 2016; 43(1): 177-185.

Rojvachiranonda N, Pyungtanasup K, Siriwan P, et al. Cadaveric study of the nasal periosteum and implant position after augmentation rhinoplasty. J Craniofac Surg. 2012; 23(4): 1163-1165.

Sepehr A, Mathew PJ, Pepper JP, et al. The Persian woman’s face: a photogrammetric analysis. Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2012; 36(3): 687-691.

Sforza C, Grandi G, De Menezes M, Age- and sex-related changes in the normal human external nose. Forensic Sci Int. 2011; 204(1-3): 205.e1-e9.

Shirakabe Y, Suzuki Y, Lam SM. A systematic approach to rhinoplasty of the Japanese nose: a thirty-year experience. Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2003; 27(3): 221-223.

Tsai FC, Liao CK, Fong TH, et al. Analysis of nasal periosteum and nasofrontal suture with clinical implications for dorsal nasal augmentation. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2010; 126(3): 1037-1047.

Woodard CR, Park SS. Nasal and facial analysis. Clin Plast Surg. 2010; 37(2): 181-189.

Gu JT, Avilla D, Devcic Z, et al. Association of frontal and lateral facial attractiveness. JAMA Facial Plast Surg. 2018; 20(1): 19-23.

Farkas LG, Kolar JC, MunroI R. Geography of the nose: a morphometric study. Aesthetic Plast Surg. 1986; 10: 191-223.

Zeng Y, Wu W, Yu H, et al. Silicone implants in augmentation rhinoplasty. Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2002; 26(2): 85-88.

He ZJ, Jian XC, Wu XS, et al. Anthropometric measurement and analysis of the external nasal soft tissue in 119 young Han Chinese adults. J Craniofac Surg. 2009; 20(5): 1347-1351.

Malkoc S, Demir A, Uysal T, et al. Angular photogrammetric analysis of the soft tissue facial profile of Turkish adults. Eur J Orthod. 2009; 31(2): 174-9.

Choe KS, Yalamanchili HR, Litner JA, et al. The Korean American woman’s nose: an in-depth nasal photogrammatic analysis. Arch Facial Plast Surg. 2006; 8(5): 319-323.

Choe KS, Sclafani AS, Litner JA, et al. The Korean-American women’s face: anthropometric measurements and quantitative analysis of facial aesthetics. Arch Facial Plast Surg. 2004; 6: 244-252.

Choi JY, Park JH, Javidnia H, et al. Effect of various facial angles and measurements on the ideal position of the nasal tip in the Asian patient population. JAMA Facial Plast Surg. 2013; 15(6): 417-421.

Patil SB, Kale SM, Jaiswal S, et al. The average Indian female nose. Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2011; 35(6): 1036-42.

Farkas LG, Kolar JC, Munro IR. Vertical and horizontal proportions of the face in young adult North American Caucasians: revision of neoclassical canons. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1995; 75: 328-337.

Packiriswamy V, Bashour M, Nayak S. Anthropometric analysis of the South Indian woman’s nose. Facial Plast Surg. 2016; 32(3): 304-308.

Cingi C, Oghan F. Teaching 3D sculpting to facial plastic surgeons. Facial Plast Surg Clin North Am. 2011; 19(4): 603-614.

Bagheri H, Sirinturk S, Govsa F, et al. Digitalized analysis of philtral anatomy for planning individual treatment. Surg Radiol Anat. 2017; 39(11): 1183-1189.

Bagheri H, Sirinturk S, Govsa F, et al. Computer-assisted analysis contour lines of aesthetic unit for the assessment of lip augmentation. Eur J Plast Surg. 2016; 39(4): 265–272.

Choe KS, Yalamanchili HR, Litner JA, et al. The Korean American woman’s nose: an in-depth nasal photogrammatic analysis. Arch Facial Plast Surg. 2006; 8(5): 319-323.

Porter JP, Olson KL. Analysis of the African-American female nose. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2003; 111: 620-626.




How to Cite

Bagheri, H., & Gövsa, F. (2023). Digital Analysis of Soft Tissue Nasal Anatomy for Individual Treatment Planning. European Journal of Therapeutics, 29(1), 41–48.



Original Articles