Dental and Medical Problems

Dent Med Probl
Index Copernicus (ICV 2020) – 128.41
MEiN – 70 pts
CiteScore (2021) – 2.0
JCI – 0.22
Average rejection rate (2021) – 81.35%
ISSN 1644-387X (print)
ISSN 2300-9020 (online)
Periodicity – quarterly

Download PDF

Dental and Medical Problems

2016, vol. 53, nr 4, October-December, p. 447–453

doi: 10.17219/dmp/64741

Publication type: original article

Language: English

Download citation:

  • BIBTEX (JabRef, Mendeley)
  • RIS (Papers, Reference Manager, RefWorks, Zotero)

Creative Commons BY-NC-ND 3.0 Open Access

Soft Tissue Profile Changes After Mandibular Setback Surgery

Zmiana profilu tkanek miękkich po jednoszczękowych zabiegach korekcji progenii

Katarzyna Bogusiak1,A,B,C,D, Marek Kociński2,A, Adam Łutkowski2,C,D, Andrzej Materka2,E,F, Aneta Neskoromna-Jędrzejczak1,E,F

1 Department of Craniomaxillofacial and Oncological Surgery, Medical University of Lodz, Łódź, Poland

2 Institute of Electronics, Department of Medical Electronics, Technical University of Lodz, Łódź, Poland

Abstract

Background. The improvement of facial aesthetics is an important element of restoring the correct bone and occlusal relation. Planning and objectively assessing the outcome of surgical-orthodontic defect treatment in the craniofacial area is based on multiple measurements of cephalometric parameters performed on radiographs.
Objectives. The aim of this study was to assess soft tissue profile changes after vertical (25 patients) and sagittal split ramus osteotomy (28 patients).
Material and Methods. The study included 53 patients with mandibular prognathism. The study group included 28 women and 25 men. The age of the patients ranged from 17 to 51 years. Lateral cephalograms (performed before the surgery and 6 months after the surgery) were used to evaluate the results of the treatment. The method proposed by Hwang et al. and the facial contour angle were used as a cephalometric analysis of soft tissue profile changes.
Results. There was no significant difference concerning the changes within the value of the facial contour angle depending on the type of treatment (t = 0.401, p > 0.05). The absolute change of this parameter in the overall group of patients equaled 11.39° ± 6.84, 10.99° ± 7.33 after the EVRO, and 11.75° ± 6.49 after the BSSO.
Conclusion. Both sagittal split ramus osteotomy and vertical ramus osteotomy provide similar improvement in the aesthetics of the facial profile, assessed with cephalometric measurements.

Key words

bilateral sagittal split ramus osteotomy (BSSO), extraoral vertical ramus osteotomy (EVRO), cephalometry

Słowa kluczowe

obustronna strzałkowa osteotomia gałęzi żuchwy, zewnątrzustna pionowa osteotomia gałęzi żuchwy, cefalometria

References (25)

  1. Olszewski R., Villamil M.B., Trevisan D.G., Nedel L.P., Freitas C.M., Reychler H., Macq B.: Towards an integrated system for planning and assisting maxillofacial orthognathic surgery. Comput. Meth. Prog. Bio. 2008, 9, 13–21.
  2. Moate S.J., Geenty J.P., Shen G., Darendeliler M.A.: A new craniofacial diagnostic technique: The Sydney diagnostic system. Am. J. Orthod. Dentofacial. Orthop. 2007, 131, 334–342.
  3. Marchetti C., Bianchi A., Muyldermans L., Di Martino M., Lancellotti L., Sarti A.: Validation of new soft tissue software in orthognathic surgery planning. Int. J. Oral Maxillofac. Surg. 2011, 40, 26–32.
  4. Nakasima A., Terajima M., Mori N., Hoshino Y., Tokumori K., Aoki Y., Hashimoto S.: Three-dimensional computer-generated head model reconstructed from cephalograms, facial photographs, and dental cast models. Am. J. Orthod. Dentofacial. Orthop. 2005, 127, 282–292.
  5. Swennen G.R., Mommaerts M.Y., Abeloos J., De Clercq C., Lamoral P., Neyt N., Casselman J., Schutyser F.: The use of a wax bite wafer and a double computed tomography scan procedure to obtain a three-dimensional augmented virtual skull model. J. Craniofac. Surg. 2007, 18, 533–539.
  6. Girod S., Keeve E., Girod B.: Advances in interactive craniofacial surgery planning by 3D simulation and visualization. Int. J. Oral Maxillofac. Surg. 1995, 24, 120–125.
  7. Groeve P.D., Schutyser F., Cleynenbreugel J.V., Suetens P.: Registration of 3D photographs with spiral CT images for soft tissue simulation in maxillofacial surgery. Lect. Notes Comput. Sci. 2001, 2208, 991–996.
  8. Swennen G.R., Mollemans W., De Clercq C., Abeloos J., Lamoral P., Lippens F., Neyt N., Casselman J., Schutyser F.: A cone-beam computed tomography triple scan procedure to obtain a three-dimensional augmented virtual skull model appropriate for orthognathic surgery planning. J. Craniofac. Surg. 2009, 20, 297–307.
  9. Jayaratne Y.S., McGrath C.P., Zwahlen R.A.: How accurate are the fusion of cone-beam CT and 3D stereophotographic images? Plos. One, 2012, 7, e49585.
  10. Kolokitha O.E.: Validity of a manual soft tissue profile prediction method following mandibular setback osteotomy. Eur. J. Dent. 2007, 1, 202–211.
  11. Ingervall B., Thüer U., Vuillemin T.: Stability and effect on the soft tissue profile of mandibular setback with sagittal split osteotomy and rigid internal fixation. Int. J. Adult Orthodon. Orthognath. Surg. 1995, 10, 15–25.
  12. Schatz J.P., Tsimas P.: Cephalometric evaluation of surgical-orthodontic treatment of skeletal class III malocclusion. Int. J. Adult Orthodon. Orthognath. Surg. 1995, 10, 173–180.
  13. Enacar A., Taner T., Toroğlu S.: Analysis of soft tissue profile changes associated with mandibular setback and double-jaw surgeries. Int. J. Adult Orthodon. Orthognath. Surg. 1999, 14, 27–35.
  14. Alves P.V., Mazucheli J., Vogel C.J., Bolognese A.M.: How the lower face soft tissue changes after mandibular advancement or setback. J. Craniofac. Surg. 2008, 19, 593–598.
  15. Gaggl A., Schultes G., Kärcher H.: Changes in soft tissue profile after sagittal split ramus osteotomy and retropositioning of the mandible. J. Oral Maxillofac. Surg. 1999, 57, 542–546.
  16. Mobarak K.A., Krogstad O., Espeland L., Lyberg T.: Factors influencing the predictability of soft tissue profile changes following mandibular setback surgery. Angle Orthod. 2001, 71, 216–227.
  17. Chou J.I., Fong H.J., Kuang S.H., Gi L.Y., Hwang F.Y., Lai Y.C., Chang R.C., Kao S.Y.: A retrospective analysis of the stability and relapse of soft and hard tissue change after bilateral sagittal split osteotomy for mandibular setback of 64 Taiwanese patients. J. Oral Maxillofac. Surg. 2005, 63, 355–361.
  18. Dal Pont G.: Retromolar osteotomy for correction of prognathism. J. Oral Surg. Anesth. Hosp. Dent. Serv. 1961, 19, 42–47.
  19. Hwang H.S., Kim W.S., McNamara J.A.: A comparative study of two methods of quantifying the soft tissue profile. Angle Orthod. 2000, 70, 200–207.
  20. Williams S.: A short guide on cephalometry in orthodontics. Polorto. Częstochowa 1998.
  21. Reyneke J.P, Ferretti C.: Clinical assessment of the face. Seminars in Orthodontics, 2012, 18, 172–186.
  22. Szyper-Szczurowska J.: Effectiveness evaluation of the combined surgical and orthodontic treatment carried out on a group of patients with skeletal class III dentofacial deformities. Doctoral thesis, Kraków 2006.
  23. Formby W.A., Nanda R.S., Currier G.F.: Longitudinal changes in the adult facial profile. Am. J. Orthod. Dentofac. Orthop. 1994, 105, 464–476.
  24. Nanda R.S., Meng H., Kapila S., Goorhuis J.: Growth changes in the soft tissue facial profile. Angle Orthod. 1990, 60, 177–190.
  25. Gordon P., Wander P.: Techniques for dental photography. Br. Dent. J. 1987, 162, 307–316.