Comparative Study of Postoperative Stability Between Conventional Orthognathic Surgery and a Surgery-first Orthognathic Approach After Bilateral Sagittal Split Ramus Osteotomy for Skeletal Class III Correction

Overview

Journal J Korean Assoc Oral Maxillofac Surg

Date 2017 Mar 11

PMID 28280706

Citations 10

Authors

Deuk-Hyun Mah

Su-Gwan Kim

Ji-Su Oh

Jae-Seek You

Seo-Yun Jung

Won-Gi Kim

Kyung-Hwan Yu

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Objectives: The purpose of this study is to compare the postoperative stability of conventional orthognathic surgery to a surgery-first orthognathic approach after bilateral sagittal split ramus osteotomy (BSSRO).

Materials And Methods: The study included 20 patients who underwent BSSRO for skeletal class III conventional orthognathic surgery and 20 patients who underwent a surgery-first orthognathic approach. Serial lateral cephalograms were analyzed to identify skeletal changes before surgery (T0), immediately after surgery (T1), and after surgery (T2, after 1 year or at debonding).

Results: The amount of relapse of the mandible in the conventional orthognathic surgery group from T1 to T2 was 2.23±0.92 mm (<0.01) forward movement and -0.87±0.57 mm (non-significant, NS) upward movement on the basis of point B and 2.54±1.37 mm (<0.01) forward movement and -1.18±0.79 mm (NS) upward movement on the basis of the pogonion (Pog) point. The relapse amount of the mandible in the surgery-first orthognathic approach group from T1 to T2 was 3.49±1.71 mm (<0.01) forward movement and -1.78±0.81 mm (<0.01) upward movement on the basis of the point B and 4.11±1.93 mm (<0.01) forward movement and -2.40±0.98 mm (<0.01) upward movement on the basis of the Pog.

Conclusion: The greater horizontal and vertical relapse may appear because of counter-clockwise rotation of the mandible in surgery-first orthognathic approach. Therefore, careful planning and skeletal stability should be considered in orthognathic surgery.

Citing Articles

Surgery-early approach combined with condylectomy for correction of severe facial asymmetry with mandibular condylar hyperplasia: a case report.

Suzuki H, Nogami S, Otake Y, Takeda Y, Sugawara J, Takahashi T J Korean Assoc Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2024; 50(4):227-234.

PMID: 39211972 PMC: 11372232. DOI: 10.5125/jkaoms.2024.50.4.227.

Reverse Engineering Orthognathic Surgery and Orthodontics in Individuals with Cleft Lip and/or Palate: A Case Report.

Ko J, Urata M, Hammoudeh J, Yamashita D, Yen S Bioengineering (Basel). 2024; 11(8).

PMID: 39199729 PMC: 11352120. DOI: 10.3390/bioengineering11080771.

The Skeletal Stability of Combined Surgery First Approach and Clear Aligners in Skeletal Class III Malocclusion Correction: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Li M, Shen S, Huang J, Wang Y, Bao J, Wang B J Clin Med. 2024; 13(3).

PMID: 38337567 PMC: 10856092. DOI: 10.3390/jcm13030872.

Comparison of 3-dimensional postoperative dental movement in Class III surgical correction with and without presurgical orthodontic treatment.

Insawak R, Lin C, Chen Y, Ko E Biomed J. 2022; 44(6 Suppl 2):S282-S295.

PMID: 35292268 PMC: 9068748. DOI: 10.1016/j.bj.2020.12.005.

Surgery First Approach in Orthognathic Surgery - Considerations and Clinical Case Report.

Borges T, Sol I, Marcondes De Castro Rodrigues C, Lima F, Silva C, Furtado L Ann Maxillofac Surg. 2022; 11(2):349-351.

PMID: 35265514 PMC: 8848694. DOI: 10.4103/ams.ams_8_21.

References

Proffit W, Turvey T, Phillips C . Orthognathic surgery: a hierarchy of stability. Int J Adult Orthodon Orthognath Surg. 1996; 11(3):191-204. View

Luther F, Morris D, Hart C . Orthodontic preparation for orthognathic surgery: how long does it take and why? A retrospective study. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2003; 41(6):401-6. DOI: 10.1016/s0266-4356(03)00163-3. View

Burstone C, James R, Legan H, Murphy G, Norton L . Cephalometrics for orthognathic surgery. J Oral Surg. 1978; 36(4):269-77. View

DOWNS W . Variations in facial relationships; their significance in treatment and prognosis. Am J Orthod. 1948; 34(10):812-40. DOI: 10.1016/0002-9416(48)90015-3. View

Baek S, Ahn H, Kwon Y, Choi J . Surgery-first approach in skeletal class III malocclusion treated with 2-jaw surgery: evaluation of surgical movement and postoperative orthodontic treatment. J Craniofac Surg. 2010; 21(2):332-8. DOI: 10.1097/SCS.0b013e3181cf5fd4. View

Baik H, Han H, Kim D, Proffit W . Cephalometric characteristics of Korean Class III surgical patients and their relationship to plans for surgical treatment. Int J Adult Orthodon Orthognath Surg. 2001; 15(2):119-28. View

Jacobs J, Sinclair P . Principles of orthodontic mechanics in orthognathic surgery cases. Am J Orthod. 1983; 84(5):399-407. DOI: 10.1016/0002-9416(93)90003-p. View

Villegas C, Uribe F, Sugawara J, Nanda R . Expedited correction of significant dentofacial asymmetry using a "surgery first" approach. J Clin Orthod. 2010; 44(2):97-103. View

Ko E, Lin S, Chen Y, Huang C . Skeletal and dental variables related to the stability of orthognathic surgery in skeletal Class III malocclusion with a surgery-first approach. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2013; 71(5):e215-23. DOI: 10.1016/j.joms.2012.12.025. View

10.

Liou E, Chen P, Wang Y, Yu C, Huang C, Chen Y . Surgery-first accelerated orthognathic surgery: postoperative rapid orthodontic tooth movement. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2011; 69(3):781-5. DOI: 10.1016/j.joms.2010.10.035. View

11.

Dowling P, Espeland L, Krogstad O, Stenvik A, Kelly A . Duration of orthodontic treatment involving orthognathic surgery. Int J Adult Orthodon Orthognath Surg. 2000; 14(2):146-52. View

12.

Bos A, Hoogstraten J, Prahl-Andersen B . Expectations of treatment and satisfaction with dentofacial appearance in orthodontic patients. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2003; 123(2):127-32. DOI: 10.1067/mod.2003.84. View

13.

Nagasaka H, Sugawara J, Kawamura H, Nanda R . "Surgery first" skeletal Class III correction using the Skeletal Anchorage System. J Clin Orthod. 2009; 43(2):97-105. View

14.

Liou E, Chen P, Wang Y, Yu C, Huang C, Chen Y . Surgery-first accelerated orthognathic surgery: orthodontic guidelines and setup for model surgery. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2011; 69(3):771-80. DOI: 10.1016/j.joms.2010.11.011. View

15.

Bailey L, Cevidanes L, Proffit W . Stability and predictability of orthognathic surgery. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2004; 126(3):273-7. PMC: 3681098. DOI: 10.1016/S0889540604005207. View

16.

TRAUNER R, OBWEGESER H . The surgical correction of mandibular prognathism and retrognathia with consideration of genioplasty. I. Surgical procedures to correct mandibular prognathism and reshaping of the chin. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1957; 10(7):677-89; contd. DOI: 10.1016/s0030-4220(57)80063-2. View

17.

Costa F, Robiony M, Politi M . Stability of sagittal split ramus osteotomy used to correct Class III malocclusion: review of the literature. Int J Adult Orthodon Orthognath Surg. 2001; 16(2):121-9. View

18.

Yu C, Chen P, Liou E, Huang C, Chen Y . A Surgery-first approach in surgical-orthodontic treatment of mandibular prognathism--a case report. Chang Gung Med J. 2011; 33(6):699-705. View

19.

Juggins K, Nixon F, Cunningham S . Patient- and clinician-perceived need for orthognathic surgery. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2005; 128(6):697-702. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2004.09.022. View

20.

Yaffe A, Fine N, Binderman I . Regional accelerated phenomenon in the mandible following mucoperiosteal flap surgery. J Periodontol. 1994; 65(1):79-83. DOI: 10.1902/jop.1994.65.1.79. View