Journal Logo


Influence of the Chin Implant on Cervicomental Angle

Dayan, Steven H. M.D.; Arkins, John P. B.S.; Antonucci, Cristina B.A.; Borst, Selika M.S., R.N.

Author Information
Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery: September 2010 - Volume 126 - Issue 3 - p 141e-143e
doi: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e3181e3b55b
  • Free


Chin augmentation in the microgenic patient is a valuable adjunct to improving the outcome of rhytidectomy, further reducing the cervicomental angle. However, does a chin implant in isolation of rhytidectomy or submentoplasty also influence the cervicomental angle? Although the symbiotic relationship between chin augmentation and rhytidectomy and between chin augmentation and rhinoplasty is well known, little is known with regard to how chin augmentation may alter other facial relationships, in particular, the cervicomental angle.

A retrospective study was performed of 76 patients who underwent a chin implant from 1999 to 2007. Of these, 17 patients did not have a face-lifting or submental liposuction procedure and met the inclusionary requirements for photographic analysis. In all cases, the chin implants were placed subperiosteally through a submental skin incision and were performed in the operating room under sterile conditions using Mersilene (Ethicon, Inc., Somerville, N.J.) mesh (polyester fiber sheeting) implants.

All photographs included met standardization criteria, including a consistency of the Frankfort horizontal in the preoperative and postoperative photographs, and lack of animation. Preoperative and postoperative profile views were evaluated by identifying the glabella, pogonion, menton, gonion-gnathion, and cervical point (Fig. 1). The anthropometric tangents of pogonion to gonion-gnathion and cervical point through the menton were then drawn. The cervicomental angle was then measured by forming a line tangent to the submentum (from the menton to the subcervicale) and a line tangent to the neck intersecting at the subcervicale.1 A protractor was then used to measure the cervicomental angle.

Fig. 1.
Fig. 1.:
Preoperative (left) and postoperative (right) profile photographs were evaluated by identifying the glabella (G), pogonion (Pg), menton (M), gonion-gnathion (Gn), and cervical point (C).

Comparison of postoperative photographs revealed that the insertion of a chin implant caused the cervicomental angle to decrease 2 to 12 degrees (mean, 5.35 ± 3.88 degrees). Preoperative cervicomental angles measured 121 to 142 degrees (mean, 133 ± 7.61 degrees). Postoperative angles ranged from 113 to 143 degrees (mean, 128.06 ± 8.47 degrees). These numbers indicate a significant decrease in the cervicomental angle after chin implantation (Table 1).

Table 1
Table 1:
Data for the 17 Patients Who Underwent Photographic Analysis

Although the mean angle of 128.06 degrees is higher than the ideal cervicomental angle as reported by Sommerville et al.,2 it is important that the decrease in cervicomental angle was the direct result of the chin implant and not any lifting procedure. Thus, a significant correction toward the ideal of the cervicomental angle can be achieved through a chin implant alone.

It is the natural subtleties that create the harmony and balance of the face, and often they are not recognized by the patient preoperatively. Computer imaging software designed to morph facial features can visually present the benefits of increasing chin projection on overall facial harmony. We have found this to be an invaluable tool for gently demonstrating the benefits of increased chin projection. Before our evaluation, we would just alter the chin projection. However, after the results of our study, we now also reduce the cervicomental angle on the imaged photograph approximately 5 degrees, consistent with our evaluation.

Placement of a chin implant in a microgenic face will result in a more youthful appearance by reducing the cervicomental angle, in addition to adding balance to a face with a prominently projected nose, lips, and forehead. Although chin augmentation is a seemingly minor addendum, its impact on facial proportion and appearance is substantial.

Steven H. Dayan, M.D.

Department of Otolaryngology

Division of Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery

University of Illinois Medical Center at Chicago

John P. Arkins, B.S.

Cristina Antonucci, B.A.

Selika Borst, M.S., R.N.

DeNova Research

Division of Aesthetic Medicine

Office of Steven H. Dayan, M.D.

Chicago, Ill.


The patient provided written consent for the use of her image.


1.Tollefson TT, Sykes JM. Computer imaging software for profile photograph analysis. Arch Facial Plast Surg. 2007;9:113–119.
2.Sommerville JM, Sperry TP, BeGole EA. Morphology of the submental and neck region. Int J Adult Orthodon Orthognath Surg. 1988;3:97–106.

Section Description


Viewpoints, pertaining to issues of general interest, are welcome, even if they are not related to items previously published. Viewpoints may present unique techniques, brief technology updates, technical notes, and so on. Viewpoints will be published on a space-available basis because they are typically less timesensitive than Letters and other types of articles. Please note the following criteria:

Authors will be listed in the order in which they appear in the submission. Viewpoints should be submitted electronically via PRS' enkwell, at We strongly encourage authors to submit figures in color.

We reserve the right to edit Viewpoints to meet requirements of space and format. Any financial interests relevant to the content must be disclosed. Submission of a Viewpoint constitutes permission for the American Society of Plastic Surgeons and its licensees and assignees to publish it in the Journal and in any other form or medium.

The views, opinions, and conclusions expressed in the Viewpoints represent the personal opinions of the individual writers and not those of the publisher, the Editorial Board, or the sponsors of the Journal. Any stated views, opinions, and conclusions do not reflect the policy of any of the sponsoring organizations or of the institutions with which the writer is affiliated, and the publisher, the Editorial Board, and the sponsoring organizations assume no responsibility for the content of such correspondence.

©2010American Society of Plastic Surgeons