Evaluation of stability and esthetic outcome following rigid fixation of a new sagittal genioplasty technique - A clinical study.
COGS analysis
modified genioplasty
sagittal advancement genioplasty
Journal
National journal of maxillofacial surgery
ISSN: 0975-5950
Titre abrégé: Natl J Maxillofac Surg
Pays: India
ID NLM: 101578767
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Historique:
received:
08
05
2020
revised:
18
06
2020
accepted:
04
09
2020
entrez:
30
6
2021
pubmed:
1
7
2021
medline:
1
7
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Routine and popular conventional genioplasty procedure is often curvilinear, requires lower border extension below, and behind the mental foramen, which after advancement has a tendency to produce step deformity, butt contact, hence nonunion, instability, and increased relapse tendencies. The present technique is aimed to study the new sagittal genioplasty technique and its efficacy to overcome the above-mentioned drawbacks of conventional genioplasty. This technique also aids in correcting mild-to-moderate breathing irregularities. A total of 10 patients included in this study. The comparative analysis of the displacement of the chin in vertical and horizontal directions following surgery was evaluated by measuring the difference between preoperative, immediate postoperative, 3 and 6 months postoperative on lateral cephalometric radiographs. The study of new sagittal chin advancement results showed an advantage over conventional technique in terms of esthetics outcome (no jowl), easy to perform without damaging the mental nerve, superior healing with less relapse, and better surface area contact. In this study, the new technique of sagittal genioplasty overcomes the disadvantages of conventional genioplasty. However, this technique is best suited for patients who require straight or moderately vertical augmentation advancement genioplasty and is not suitable for asymmetry corrections, i.e., centering genioplasty and double sliding genioplasty.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Routine and popular conventional genioplasty procedure is often curvilinear, requires lower border extension below, and behind the mental foramen, which after advancement has a tendency to produce step deformity, butt contact, hence nonunion, instability, and increased relapse tendencies. The present technique is aimed to study the new sagittal genioplasty technique and its efficacy to overcome the above-mentioned drawbacks of conventional genioplasty. This technique also aids in correcting mild-to-moderate breathing irregularities.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
METHODS
A total of 10 patients included in this study. The comparative analysis of the displacement of the chin in vertical and horizontal directions following surgery was evaluated by measuring the difference between preoperative, immediate postoperative, 3 and 6 months postoperative on lateral cephalometric radiographs.
RESULTS
RESULTS
The study of new sagittal chin advancement results showed an advantage over conventional technique in terms of esthetics outcome (no jowl), easy to perform without damaging the mental nerve, superior healing with less relapse, and better surface area contact.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
In this study, the new technique of sagittal genioplasty overcomes the disadvantages of conventional genioplasty. However, this technique is best suited for patients who require straight or moderately vertical augmentation advancement genioplasty and is not suitable for asymmetry corrections, i.e., centering genioplasty and double sliding genioplasty.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34188396
doi: 10.4103/njms.NJMS_76_20
pii: NJMS-12-17
pmc: PMC8191550
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
17-24Informations de copyright
Copyright: © 2021 National Journal of Maxillofacial Surgery.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
There are no conflicts of interest.
Références
J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2010 Apr;68(4):931-4
pubmed: 20307778
J Oral Surg. 1977 Aug;35(8):640-7
pubmed: 267188
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2002 Dec;122(6):627-34
pubmed: 12490874
J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1984 Apr;42(4):238-42
pubmed: 6584569
J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2001 May;59(5):510-6; discussion 517
pubmed: 11326372
J Oral Surg. 1981 Jul;39(7):505-9
pubmed: 6940958
Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2015 Jul;53(6):572-3
pubmed: 25886876
Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol. 2015 Dec;120(6):670-8
pubmed: 26320089
J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2012 May;70(5):1177-82
pubmed: 21798646
Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2014 Dec;18(4):439-44
pubmed: 24271827
J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1984 Oct;42(10):637-45
pubmed: 6592305
J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1991 Mar;49(3):251-6
pubmed: 1995814
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2006 Jul;130(1):8-17
pubmed: 16849066
Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1994 Mar;77(3):218-21
pubmed: 8170650
Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2015 Jun;44(6):760-2
pubmed: 25721920