Application of Surgery-First Approach in Treating Skeletal Dentofacial Asymmetry with Orthognathic Surgery.
Humans
Prognathism
/ diagnostic imaging
Orthognathic Surgery
Quality of Life
Facial Asymmetry
/ diagnostic imaging
Orthognathic Surgical Procedures
/ methods
Treatment Outcome
Malocclusion, Angle Class III
/ diagnostic imaging
Cephalometry
/ methods
Mandible
/ surgery
Imaging, Three-Dimensional
/ methods
Journal
The Journal of craniofacial surgery
ISSN: 1536-3732
Titre abrégé: J Craniofac Surg
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 9010410
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 Sep 2023
01 Sep 2023
Historique:
received:
31
01
2023
accepted:
06
03
2023
medline:
31
8
2023
pubmed:
5
6
2023
entrez:
5
6
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Skeletal dentofacial asymmetry decreases patient's attractiveness by deteriorating symmetry of facial appearance which is of great significance to individuals. Surgery-first orthognathic approach manifests its advantages of shortening treatment time and improving patient's quality of life. However, current literature on surgery-first approach mainly focuses on treating prognathism, overlooking its efficacy in improving facial symmetry of skeletal dentofacial asymmetry patients. This study aimed to assess SFA's efficacy in improving facial appearance by analyzing morphological features of asymmetric bone and facial soft tissue in a three-dimensional manner. Thirty-four patients who received orthognathic surgery in a surgery-first fashion were included. Based on three-dimensional CT reconstruction, bilateral preoperative morphological features and postoperative symmetry of hard tissue were compared respectively. Efficacy of facial soft tissue symmetry restoration was evaluated using root mean square deviation (RMSD). Asymmetric features mainly located in menton, mandibular body length, angulation between ramus and midsagittal plane (MSP), distance between gonion and MSP and so on, which were significantly restored after the whole treatment. RMSD of facial soft tissue surface were significantly declined after the treatment and prognathism was corrected simultaneously if existed. Surgery-first orthognathic approach is proved to be capable of treating skeletal dentofacial asymmetry effectively and efficiently.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Skeletal dentofacial asymmetry decreases patient's attractiveness by deteriorating symmetry of facial appearance which is of great significance to individuals. Surgery-first orthognathic approach manifests its advantages of shortening treatment time and improving patient's quality of life. However, current literature on surgery-first approach mainly focuses on treating prognathism, overlooking its efficacy in improving facial symmetry of skeletal dentofacial asymmetry patients. This study aimed to assess SFA's efficacy in improving facial appearance by analyzing morphological features of asymmetric bone and facial soft tissue in a three-dimensional manner.
METHODS
METHODS
Thirty-four patients who received orthognathic surgery in a surgery-first fashion were included. Based on three-dimensional CT reconstruction, bilateral preoperative morphological features and postoperative symmetry of hard tissue were compared respectively. Efficacy of facial soft tissue symmetry restoration was evaluated using root mean square deviation (RMSD).
RESULTS
RESULTS
Asymmetric features mainly located in menton, mandibular body length, angulation between ramus and midsagittal plane (MSP), distance between gonion and MSP and so on, which were significantly restored after the whole treatment. RMSD of facial soft tissue surface were significantly declined after the treatment and prognathism was corrected simultaneously if existed.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Surgery-first orthognathic approach is proved to be capable of treating skeletal dentofacial asymmetry effectively and efficiently.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37276330
doi: 10.1097/SCS.0000000000009396
pii: 00001665-202309000-00048
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
1817-1821Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2023 by Mutaz B. Habal, MD.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors report no conflicts of interest.
Références
McCrea S, Troy M. Prevalence and severity of mandibular asymmetry in non-syndromic, non-pathological caucasian adult. Ann Maxillofac Surg 2018;8:254–258
Leung MY, Leung YY. Three-dimensional evaluation of mandibular asymmetry: a new classification and three-dimensional cephalometric analysis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2018;47:1043–1051
Kamata H, Higashihori N, Fukuoka H, et al. Comprehending the three-dimensional mandibular morphology of facial asymmetry patients with mandibular prognathism. Prog Orthod 2017;18:43
Nagasaka H, Sugawara J, Kawamura H, et al. “Surgery first” skeletal class III correction using the skeletal anchorage system. J Clin Orthod 2009;43:97–105
Reilly MJ, Parsa KM, Biel M. Is there a selfie epidemic. JAMA Facial Plast Surg 2019;21:367–368
Little AC, Jones BC, DeBruine LM. Facial attractiveness: evolutionary based research. Philos Trans R Soc London Ser B, Biological Sci 2022;366:1638–1659
Choi JW, Park H, Kwon SM, et al. Surgery-first orthognathic approach for the correction of facial asymmetry. J Cranio-Maxillofacial Surg 2021;49:435–442
Hildebolt CF, Vannier MW, Knapp RH. Validation study of skull three-dimensional computerized tomography measurements. Am J Phys Anthropol 1990;82:283–294
Chen YJ, Yao CC, Chang ZC, et al. A new classification of mandibular asymmetry and evaluation of surgical-orthodontic treatment outcomes in Class III malocclusion. J Cranio-Maxillofacial Surg 2016;44:676–683
Green MN, Bloom JM, Kulbersh R. A simple and accurate craniofacial midsagittal plane definition. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 2017;152:355–363
Taylor HO, Morrison CS, Linden O, et al. Quantitative facial asymmetry: Using three-dimensional photogrammetry to measure baseline facial surface symmetry. J Craniofac Surg 2014;25:124–128
Linden OE, Kit He J, Morrison CS, et al. The relationship between age and facial asymmetry. Plast Reconstr Surg 2018;142:1145–1152
Ozsoy U. Comparison of different calculation methods used to analyze facial soft tissue asymmetry: global and partial 3-dimensional quantitative evaluation of healthy subjects. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2016;74:1847.e1–1847.e9
Core Team R. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Published online 2021. https://www.r-project.org/
Feu D, de Oliveira BH, Palomares NB, et al. Oral health-related quality of life changes in patients with severe class III malocclusion treated with the 2-jaw surgery-first approach. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 2017;151:1048–1057
Park J-K, Choi J-Y, Yang I-H, et al. Patient’s satisfaction in skeletal class III cases treated with two-jaw surgery using orthognathic quality of life questionnaire. J Craniofac Surg 2015;26:2086–2093
Brucoli M, Zeppegno P, Benech R, et al. Psychodynamic features associated with orthognathic surgery: a comparison between conventional orthognathic treatment and “surgery-first” approach. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2019;77:157–163
Liao Y-F, Chiu Y-T, Huang C-S, et al. Presurgical orthodontics versus no presurgical orthodontics: treatment outcome of surgical-orthodontic correction for skeletal class III open bite. Plast Reconstr Surg 2010;126:2074–2083
Liou EJW, Chen P-H, Wang Y-C, et al. Surgery-first accelerated orthognathic surgery: orthodontic guidelines and setup for model surgery. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2011;69:771–780
Choi JW, Lee JY, Yang SJ, et al. The reliability of a surgery-first orthognathic approach without presurgical orthodontic treatment for skeletal class III dentofacial deformity. Ann Plast Surg 2015;74:333–341
Huang C, Hsu S-P, Chen Y-R. Systematic review of the surgery-first approach in orthognathic surgery. Biomed J 2014;37:184–190
Park J, Baumrind S, Curry S, et al. Reliability of 3D dental and skeletal landmarks on CBCT images. Angle Orthod 2019;89:758–767
Hsu PJ, Denadai R, Pai BCJ, et al. Outcome of facial contour asymmetry after conventional two-dimensional versus computer-assisted three-dimensional planning in cleft orthognathic surgery. Sci Rep 2020;10:1–12
Liu LC, Chen YA, Chen RF, et al. Type of mandibular asymmetry affects changes and outcomes of bimaxillary surgery for class III asymmetry. Clin Oral Investig 2021;28:1077–1088
Dumrongwongsiri S, Lin HH, Niu LS, et al. Customized three-dimensional printing spacers for bone positioning in orthognathic surgery for correction and prevention of facial asymmetry. Plast Reconstr Surg 2019;144:246e–251e
Codari M, Pucciarelli V, Stangoni F, et al. Facial thirds–based evaluation of facial asymmetry using stereophotogrammetric devices: application to facial palsy subjects. J Cranio-Maxillofacial Surg 2017;45:76–81
Baek S-H, Cho I-S, Chang Y-I, et al. Skeletodental factors affecting chin point deviation in female patients with class III malocclusion and facial asymmetry: a three-dimensional analysis using computed tomography. Oral Surgery, Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endodontol 2007;104:628–639
Lee H, Bayome M, Kim S-H, et al. Mandibular dimensions of subjects with asymmetric skeletal Class III malocclusion and normal occlusion compared with cone-beam computed tomography. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 2012;142:179–185
Patel A, Islam SMS, Murray K, et al. Facial asymmetry assessment in adults using three-dimensional surface imaging. Prog Orthod 2015;16:36
Baratta VM, Linden OE, Byrne ME, et al. A quantitative analysis of facial asymmetry in torticollis using 3-dimensional photogrammetry. Cleft Palate-Craniofacial J 2022;59:40–46