Association Between Maxillary Dental Arch Form and Buccal Corridor Space Percentage in Dentate Adults: A Cross-Sectional Analytical Study
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.52206/jsmc.2026.16.3.1399Abstract
Background: Smile aesthetics constitute an essential component of successful prosthodontic rehabilitation and are strongly influenced by the harmonious relationship between dental and facial structures. Buccal corridor space (BCS), defined as the negative space visible between the maxillary posterior teeth and the corners of the mouth during smiling, is an important determinant of smile attractiveness. Although dental arch form is believed to influence BCS, objective quantitative data describing this relationship in naturally dentate individuals remain limited.
Objective: To compare buccal corridor space percentages (BCS%) among dentate individuals with square, ovoid, and tapered maxillary dental arch forms.
Methodology: This analytical cross-sectional study included 159 dentate adults aged 18–35 years, equally distributed among square, ovoid, and tapered arch-form groups (n=53 each). Maxillary arch forms were classified using the intercanine-to-intermolar width ratio measured on dental casts. Standardized frontal smile photographs were obtained, and BCS% was calculated using calibrated digital measurements. Differences in mean BCS% among arch forms were evaluated using one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) followed by Tukey's post hoc test. Multivariable linear regression was performed to assess the independent association of arch form with BCS% after adjustment for age and gender.
Results: Among the 159 participants, 82 (51.6%) were females and 77 (48.4%) were males, with a mean age of 27.8 ± 5.2 years. Mean BCS% differed significantly among the three arch forms (p<0.001), with the lowest values observed in square arches (4.42 ± 1.52), intermediate values in ovoid arches (5.96 ± 1.69), and the highest values in tapered arches (7.34 ± 1.85). Post hoc analysis demonstrated significant differences between all pairwise comparisons (p<0.001). Multivariable regression confirmed arch form as an independent predictor of BCS%, whereas age, gender, and interaction terms were not statistically significant (p>0.05).
Conclusion: Maxillary dental arch form is significantly associated with buccal corridor space percentage in naturally dentate adults. Tapered arches exhibit the greatest BCS%, whereas square arches demonstrate the smallest values. These normative findings may assist prosthodontists and restorative dentists in individualized smile design and esthetic rehabilitation.
Keywords: Buccal Corridor Space, Dental Arch Form, Dentate Adults, Prosthodontics, Smile Aesthetics.
References
Pham TA, Nguyen PA. Morphological features of smile attractiveness and related factors influence perception and gingival aesthetic parameters. Int Dent J. 2022 Feb 1;72(1):67-75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.identj.2021.02.001
Banditsaowapak P, Cheng JH, Chen DD, Chou MY. Three-dimensional analysis of posed smile in adults: A scoping review. J Dent Sci. 2024 Apr 1;19(2):773-86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jds.2023.10.021
El-Bokle D, Ghany AH. An evidence-based treatment planning guide for a gummy smile. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop Clin Comp. 2024 Aug 1;4(4):279-91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.xaor.2024.05.003
Bors A, Mucenic S, Monea A, Ormenisan A, Beresescu G. from conventional to smart prosthetics: redefining complete denture therapy through technology and regenerative science. Med. 2025 Jun 18;61(6):1104. https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina61061104
Memon S, Jabbar A, Permanand, Shaikh S, Khayyam U, Khalid Q. Evaluation of Buccal Corridors in Patients Seeking Orthodontic Treatment in Different Types of Malocclusion at Tertiary Care Hospital: Buccal Corridors in Patients Seeking Orthodontic Treatment. PJHSL. 2022;3:122-6. https://doi.org/10.54393/pjhs.v3i07.429
Ntovas P, Karkazi F, Özbilen EÖ, Flavio A, Ladia O, Papazoglou E, et al. Perception of smile attractiveness among laypeople and orthodontists regarding the buccal corridor space, as it is defined by the eyes. An innovated technique. J Esth Rest Dent. 2023 Mar;35(2):345-51. https://doi.org/10.1111/jerd.13005
Khalid M, Javed S, Ihsan P, Naeem M, Chughtai Ma, Khan E, et al. Perception about importance of buccal corridor and its width in smile esthetics. Pak J Med Health Sci.2021;15:3033-5. https://doi.org/10.53350/pjmhs2115103033
Zia AU, Mahmood A, Ilyas K, Jabbar A, Ghauri AF, Shah SR, et al. Relationship of intercommissure width with buccal corridor display during social smile. Pak Orthod J. 2019;11(2):61-5.
Budiman JA. Mathematical ratio in defining arch form. Dent Hypotheses. 2017;8:70-3. https://doi.org/10.4103/denthyp.denthyp_26_17
Niaki EA, Arab S, Shamshiri A, Imani MM. The effect of the buccal corridor and tooth display on smile attractiveness. Aust Orthodont J. 2015;31(2):195-200. https://doi.org/10.21307/aoj-2020-155
Oz AA, Akdeniz BS, Canli E, Celik S. Smile attractiveness: differences among the perceptions of dental professionals and laypersons. Turk J Orthod. 2017;30(2):50–5. https://doi.org/10.5152/TurkJOrthod.2017.17021
Sayahpour B, Eslami S, Schulz B, Balut MG, Plein N, Grassia V, et al. The perception of facial esthetics with regard to different buccal corridors and facial proportions. APOS Trend Orthod. 2025;15:49-58. https://doi.org/10.25259/APOS_105_2024
Imani MM, Nezhad EM, Golshah A, Safari-Faramani R. Optimal gingival display on smiling based on different facial vertical patterns in Iranians. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2023;163(6):766-776. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2022.06.02
Yong CW, Lee LX, Lee JJ, Lee JX, Koh WC, Lim AAT. Influence of lip form on the perceived ideal incisal show at rest. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2022;161(5):e439–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2021.07.015
Ghorbanyjavadpour F, Rakhshan V. Factors associated with the beauty of soft-tissue profile. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2019;155(6):832–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2018.07.020
Cotrim ER, Vasconcelos Júnior ÁV, Haddad ACSS, Reis SAB. Perception of adults’ smile esthetics among orthodontists, clinicians and laypeople. Dental Press J Orthod. 2015;20(1):40–4. https://doi.org/10.1590/2176-9451.20.1.040-044.oar
Ahrari F, Heravi F, Rashed R, Zarrabi MJ, Setayesh Y. Which factors affect dental esthetics and smile attractiveness in orthodontically treated patients? J Dent (Tehran, Iran). 2015;12(7):491-503. https://doi.org/10.4103/2349-5243.192526
Raberin M, Laumon B, Martin JL, Brunner F. Dimensions and form of dental arches in subjects with normal occlusions. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1993;104(1):67–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/0889-5406(93)70029-N
Felton DA, Sinclair PM, Jones DL, Alexander RG. A computerized analysis of the shape and stability of mandibular arch form. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1987;92(6):478–483. https://doi.org/10.1016/0889-5406(87)90229-0
Additional Files
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 The authors retain the copyrights. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g. in institutional repositories or on their website), as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as greater citation of published work.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Readers may “Share-copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format” and “Adapt-remix, transform, and build upon the material”. The readers must give appropriate credit to the source of the material and indicate if changes were made to the material. Readers may not use the material for commercial purpose. The readers may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
