Evaluation of bone contact area and intercondylar distance changes in orthognathic surgery - a comparison between BSSO and HSSO technique depending on mandibular displacement extent.
Bilateral sagittal split osteotomy
Bone contact area
High oblique sagittal split osteotomy
Mandible displacement
Orthognathic surgery
Temporomandibular joint
Journal
Clinical oral investigations
ISSN: 1436-3771
Titre abrégé: Clin Oral Investig
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 9707115
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 Mar 2024
01 Mar 2024
Historique:
received:
04
11
2023
accepted:
25
02
2024
medline:
4
3
2024
pubmed:
1
3
2024
entrez:
29
2
2024
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The present study aims to assess the impact of bilateral and high oblique sagittal split osteotomy (BSSO/HSSO), as well as displacement distances and directions on the expected and achievable bone contact area (BCA) and changes in the intercondylar distance (ICD). The primary question addressed is whether mandibular splitting through BSSO results in a greater BCA and/or ICD when compared to splitting through HSSO. Totally 80 mandibular displacements were performed on 20 fresh cadavers, for each subject, four splints were produces to facilitate mandibular advancement as well as setbacks of 4 and 8 mm. Pre- and postoperative CBCT scans were performed to plan the surgical procedures and to analyze the expected and achieved BCA and ICD. Regarding the maximum mandibular displacement, the expected BCA for HSSO/BSSO were 352.58 ± 96.55mm Compared to the virtual planning, the predictability regarding BCA and ICD was limited. ICD showed smaller clinical changes, BCA decreased significantly in the BSSO group. BCA and ICD might have been less important in choosing the suitable split technique. in orthognathic surgery.
Identifiants
pubmed: 38424318
doi: 10.1007/s00784-024-05584-8
pii: 10.1007/s00784-024-05584-8
pmc: PMC10904418
doi:
Substances chimiques
beta-sitosterol oleate
3712-16-1
Sitosterols
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
182Informations de copyright
© 2024. The Author(s).
Références
Obwegeser H (1964) The indications for Surgical correction of Mandibular deformity by the Sagittal splitting technique. Br J Oral Surg 1:157–171
doi: 10.1016/S0007-117X(63)80067-0
pubmed: 14122415
Dal Pont G (1961) Retromolar osteotomy for the correction of prognathism. J Oral Surg Anesth Hosp Dent Serv 19:42–47
pubmed: 13719390
Hunsuck EE (1968) A modified intraoral sagittal splitting technic for correction of mandibular prognathism. J Oral Surg 26(4):250–253
pubmed: 5237786
Epker BN (1977) Modifications in the sagittal osteotomy of the mandible. J Oral Surg 35(2):157–159
pubmed: 264514
Möhlhenrich SC, Kniha K, Peters F et al (2017) Fracture patterns after bilateral sagittal split osteotomy of the mandibular ramus according to the Obwegeser/Dal Pont and Hunsuck/Epker modifications. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 45(5):762–767
doi: 10.1016/j.jcms.2017.02.012
pubmed: 28344028
Möhlhenrich SC, Ayoub N, Peters F et al (2019) Evaluation of the lingual fracture patterns after bilateral sagittal split osteotomy according to Hunsuck/Epker modified by an additional inferior border osteotomy using a burr or ultrasonic device. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 48(5):620–628
doi: 10.1016/j.ijom.2018.11.013
pubmed: 30579742
Kuehle R, Berger M, Saure D, Hoffmann J, Seeberger R (2016) High oblique sagittal split osteotomy of the mandible: assessment of the positions of the mandibular condyles after orthognathic surgery based on cone-beam tomography. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 54(6):638–642
doi: 10.1016/j.bjoms.2016.03.017
pubmed: 27050098
Seeberger R, Asi Y, Thiele OC, Hoffmann J, Stucke K, Engel M (2013) Neurosensory alterations and function of the temporomandibular joint after high oblique sagittal split osteotomy: an alternative technique in orthognathic surgery. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 51(6):536–540
doi: 10.1016/j.bjoms.2012.11.016
pubmed: 23260982
D’Agostino A, Trevisiol L, Gugole F, Bondi V, Nocini PF (2010) Complications of orthognathic surgery: the inferior alveolar nerve. J Craniofac Surg 21(4):1189–1195
doi: 10.1097/SCS.0b013e3181e1b5ff
pubmed: 20613608
Wittwer G, Adeyemo WL, Beinemann J, Juergens P (2012) Evaluation of risk of injury to the inferior alveolar nerve with classical sagittal split osteotomy technique and proposed alternative surgical techniques using computer-assisted surgery. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 41(1):79–86
doi: 10.1016/j.ijom.2011.08.001
pubmed: 21925838
Kaduk WM, Podmelle F, Louis PJ (2012) Revisiting the supraforaminal horizontal oblique osteotomy of the mandible. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 70(2):421–428
doi: 10.1016/j.joms.2011.02.027
pubmed: 21684657
Seifert LB, Langhans C, Berdan Y et al (2023) Comparison of two surgical techniques (HOO vs. BSSO) for mandibular osteotomies in orthognathic surgery-a 10-year retrospective study. Oral Maxillofac Surg 27(2):341–351
doi: 10.1007/s10006-022-01073-y
pubmed: 35595944
Möhlhenrich SC, Kamal M, Peters F, Fritz U, Hölzle F, Modabber A (2016) Bony contact area and displacement of the temporomandibular joint after high-oblique and bilateral sagittal split osteotomy: a computer-simulated comparison. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 54(3):306–311
doi: 10.1016/j.bjoms.2015.12.020
pubmed: 26874370
Modabber A, Ayoub N, Mohlhenrich SC et al (2014) The accuracy of computer-assisted primary mandibular reconstruction with vascularized bone flaps: iliac crest bone flap versus osteomyocutaneous fibula flap. Med Devices 7:211–217
doi: 10.2147/MDER.S62698
Möhlhenrich SC, Heussen N, Ayoub N, Holzle F, Modabber A (2015) Three-dimensional evaluation of the different donor sites of the mandible for autologous bone grafts. Clin Oral Invest 19(2):453–458
doi: 10.1007/s00784-014-1235-0
Seeberger R, Thiele OC, Mertens C, Hoffmann J, Engel M (2013) Proximal segment positioning with high oblique sagittal split osteotomy: indications and limits of intraoperative mobile cone-beam computerized tomography. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol 115(6):731–736
doi: 10.1016/j.oooo.2012.10.016
pubmed: 23312538
Scheuer HA, Holtje WJ (2001) [Stability of the mandible after high sagittal supraforaminal osteotomy. Roentgen cephalometric study]. Mund- Kiefer- und Gesichtschirurgie: MKG 5(5):283–292
doi: 10.1007/s100060100319
pubmed: 11693018
Carlos HV, Marta BL, Orlando PM, Samuel UE, Sader R, Seifert LB (2021) Stress distribution is susceptible to the angle of the osteotomy in the high oblique sagittal osteotomy (HOSO): biomechanical evaluation using finite element analyses. Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Engin 24(1):67–75
doi: 10.1080/10255842.2020.1810242
pubmed: 32845167
Proffit WR, Turvey TA, Phillips C (2007) The hierarchy of stability and predictability in orthognathic surgery with rigid fixation: an update and extension. Head Face Med 3:21
doi: 10.1186/1746-160X-3-21
pubmed: 17470277
pmcid: 1876453
Bailey L, Cevidanes LH, Proffit WR (2004) Stability and predictability of orthognathic surgery. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 126(3):273–277
doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2004.06.003
Wolford LM, Reiche-Fischel O, Mehra P (2003) Changes in temporomandibular joint dysfunction after orthognathic surgery. J oral Maxillofacial Surgery: Official J Am Association Oral Maxillofacial Surg 61(6):655–660 discussion 661
doi: 10.1053/joms.2003.50131
Tamura N, Takaki T, Takano N, Shibahara T (2018) Three-dimensional finite element analysis of bone fixation in bilateral Sagittal Split Ramus Osteotomy using individual models. Bull Tokyo Dent Coll 59(2):67–78
doi: 10.2209/tdcpublication.2013-3000
pubmed: 29962423
Chen YF, Ko EC, Zaghi S et al (2020) Optimizing mandibular sagittal split of large maxillomandibular advancements for obstructive sleep apnea: patient and surgical factors. Clin Oral Investig 24(3):1359–1367
doi: 10.1007/s00784-019-03017-5
pubmed: 31332567
Möhlhenrich SC, Winterhalder P, Ooms M et al (2021) Changes in the temporomandibular joint position depending on the sagittal osteotomy technique and extent of mandibular movement. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 50(3):356–366
doi: 10.1016/j.ijom.2020.06.009
pubmed: 32620453
Hölzle F, Franz EP, Lehmbrock J et al (2012) Thiel embalming technique: a valuable method for teaching oral surgery and implantology. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 14(1):121–126
doi: 10.1111/j.1708-8208.2009.00230.x
pubmed: 19673955
Peuker ET, Werkmeister R, Pera F, Joos U, Filler TJ (2001) Surgical procedures in mouth, jaw and facial surgery in Thiel embalmed body donors. Mund Kiefer Gesichtschir 5(2):141–143
doi: 10.1007/PL00010796
pubmed: 11372181
Möhlhenrich SC, Kotter F, Peters F et al (2021) Effects of different surgical techniques and displacement distances on the soft tissue profile via orthodontic-orthognathic treatment of class II and class III malocclusions. Head Face Med 17(1):13
doi: 10.1186/s13005-021-00264-4
pubmed: 33853633
pmcid: 8048257
Vale F, Francisco I, Scherzberg J, Guimaraes A, Caramelo F, Malo L (2018) Condylar response to large mandibular advancement combined with maxillary impaction and counterclockwise rotation: a computed tomographic study. J Clin Exp Dent 10(9):e891–e901
pubmed: 30386522
pmcid: 6203919
Verhelst PJ, Van der Cruyssen F, De Laat A, Jacobs R, Politis C (2019) The Biomechanical Effect of the Sagittal Split Ramus Osteotomy on the Temporomandibular Joint: current perspectives on the remodeling spectrum. Front Physiol 10:1021
doi: 10.3389/fphys.2019.01021
pubmed: 31447704
pmcid: 6692453
Herrera-Vizcaino C, Seifert L, Berdan M et al (2021) Revision of 116 orthognathic surgery patients operated on with the high-oblique sagittal osteotomy (HOSO): a retrospective case series (PROCESS-compliant article). Clin Oral Investig 25(5):3229–3236
doi: 10.1007/s00784-020-03653-2
pubmed: 33106901
Ow A, Cheung LK (2009) Skeletal stability and complications of bilateral sagittal split osteotomies and mandibular distraction osteogenesis: an evidence-based review. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 67(11):2344–2353
doi: 10.1016/j.joms.2008.07.003
pubmed: 19837301