A Cross-Sectional Study Examining Andrews' Analysis in Caucasian and African American Subjects.

BACKGROUND: Andrews' analysis is a commonly utilized instrument to aid in esthetic positioning of the anteroposterior position of the maxillomandibular complex; however, there is limited data regarding use in non-Caucasian subjects. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to document laypersons preferences of anteroposterior position of the maxillomandibular complex in relation to Andrews' lateral profile analysis in African American (AA) and Caucasian subjects. STUDY DESIGN, SETTING, SAMPLE: A cross-sectional study was implemented to evaluate the esthetics of AA and Caucasian subjects. Photographs were taken and simulated with anteroposterior maxillomandibular complex positioning in varying relationships to Andrews' goal anterior line limit. A survey was then designed to select the preferred simulation of the facial profile of each subject. INDEPENDENT VARIABLE: The independent variable was the race of the study subjects. MAIN OUTCOME VARIABLE: The main outcome was the layperson's preferred lateral facial profile for each subject. COVARIATES: The covariates included age, race, sex, education level, income, of the laypersons. ANALYSES: A proportion test was used to decide which profile was preferred. Logistic regression analyses were conducted to assess the association between the preference and respondent demographics. P < .05 was considered significant. RESULTS: A total of 264 surveys were distributed, and 250 complete surveys were utilized (response rate = 95%). Respondents were majority male (51.2%), aged 35-44 (37.2%), college-educated (57.2%), earning between $20,000 and $50,000 annually (44%), and identified as Caucasian (77.2%). For the female subjects, the respondents preferred +4 and + 6 mm anterior to goal anterior line limit with 54.2% for the Caucasian and 65.9% for the AA subjects (difference = 11.7%; 95% CI:2.7 to 20.7%; P = .008). For the males, 47.4% of the respondents chose 0 mm and +2 mm for the AA subject, while only 24.9% preferred +2 mm for the Caucasian male (difference = 22.5%; 95% CI: 13.8 to 31.1%; P < .0001). Respondent demographics were not found to influence selection. CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: The preferred facial profile as judged by laypersons differs between Caucasian and AA subjects when defined through Andrews' analysis.

Does Tranexamic Acid Reduce the Need for Hypotensive Anesthesia Within Orthognathic Surgery? A Retrospective Study.

Background: Tranexamic acid (TXA) is utilized frequently in orthognathic surgery to limit blood loss and improve surgical field visualization. This antifibrinolytic has been proven effective with use of concomitant hypotensive anesthesia. Despite proven efficacy, there is a recent push to avoid perioperative hypotensive anesthesia due to risks of organ hypoperfusion, cardiac ischemia and postoperative nausea. Aims: The aim is to study the efficacy and safety of utilizing TXA without controlled hypotensive anesthesia. Methods: The authors identified two cohorts of subjects that underwent bimaxillary orthognathic surgery both with and without TXA administration and compared operative and perioperative variables. A retrospective analysis was completed evaluating intraoperative MAP measurements in subjects treated both with and without TXA using descriptive and bivariate analysis. Results and conclusion: Sixty-three subjects met inclusion criteria. The TXA cohort experienced 11.5% less time under hypotensive anesthesia when compared to the group that did not receive TXA. Additionally, surgical length was decreased by more than 28 min when subjects received TXA. No subjects required a blood transfusion or experienced any TXA-related complications. Given the recommendations to limit hypotensive anesthesia perioperatively, TXA is a useful adjunct in orthognathic surgery to limit controlled hypotensive anesthesia.

Validation of Andrews Analysis in the Virtual Environment.

BACKGROUND: Andrews analysis is a tool to establish the aesthetic anteroposterior position of the maxilla. Andrews analysis has not been evaluated through computer-aided surgical simulation (CASS). PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of Andrews profile analysis when performed in the virtual environment. STUDY DESIGN, SETTING, SAMPLE: A retrospective cohort study was implemented with consecutive patients undergoing orthognathic surgery between February 2020 and February 2022 at the University of Alabama, Birmingham. Traditional Andrews analysis with lateral smiling photographs were taken during the presurgical appointment in adjusted natural head position (aNHP). The standard cone-beam CT obtained for CASS and archived on the KLS Martin (Jacksonville, Florida) database was accessed for retrospective measurement. Lateral facial photographs in aNHP were imported into the virtual environment and the three dimensional (3D) composite model was then oriented into aNHP. The software engineer, blinded to the traditional measurements, then performed the Andrews analysis in the virtual environment by placing a vertical glabella line on the 3D composite model in aNHP. The linear horizontal distance of the maxillary central incisor perpendicular to the vertical glabella line was recorded. PREDICTOR/EXPOSURE/INDEPENDENT VARIABLE: Method of Andrews analysis measurement (traditional photographic evaluation vs CASS) MAIN OUTCOME VARIABLE: Linear Andrews analysis measurement. COVARIATES: Additional covariates evaluated were sex, age at surgery, and dentofacial deformity diagnosis. ANALYSES: Descriptive statistics were computed to compare photographic analysis versus CASS analysis. A P value of <.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: The average age was 25.7 years old and 54% of patients were female. For the photographic analysis, the mean incisor-goal anterior limit line distance was -0.44 ± 7.12 mm (95% CI, -1.13 to 0.37 mm; P = .46). For the virtual analysis, the mean incisor-goal anterior limit line distance was 0.13 ± 7.21 (95% CI, -0.004 to 0.30; P = .89). The Pearson correlation coefficients between the photograph and 3D analysis were very strong (0.93). The root mean square deviation between the photographic and 3D analysis cohorts was 2.7 mm. CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: Given the high correlation coefficients between all demographics, CASS can be utilized for Andrews analysis to determine ideal anteroposterior maxillary position to streamline data collection and the planning process.

Does the Rigid External Distraction Device Alter Maxillary Pitch in Cleft Maxillary Distraction?

The rigid external distraction (RED) device is reported to have the ability to three-dimensionally reposition the maxilla. The purpose of this study is to assess the ability of RED to intentionally alter the maxillary pitch.Retrospective cohort study.Institutional practice.A retrospective chart review was completed over the past 12 years and a total of 50 patients met the inclusion criteria.Cephalometric changes and alteration in palatal plane angle.Cephalometric analysis of standardized landmarks was completed on calibrated, standardized lateral cephalograms. Pre-distraction and post-consolidation variables were compared via a two-tailed paired t-test.The mean age at surgery of 12.2 ± 3.2 years. Through distraction osteogenesis (DO), the maxilla was moved anteriorly with a mean distraction distance of 8.4 ± 4.8 mm. The mean change in the angles sella-nasion-A-point angle (SNA), sella-nasion-B-point angle (SNB), and A-point-nasion-B-point angle (ANB) were 10.2 ± 4.8, 0.9 ± 2.7, and 9.3 ± 4.1, respectively. The mean change in the palatal plane angle was -4.4 ± 3.7. The mean change in the vertical position of the anterior nasal spine (ANS) and posterior nasal spine (PNS) in relation to the Frankfort horizontal (FH) were -2.0 ± 4.1 mm and 1.7 ± 3.8 mm, respectively.This study documents short-term findings of RED in a large cleft lip and palate (CLP) population. Despite positioning of distraction eyelets superior to the theoretical center of resistance, a counterclockwise (CCW) rotation of the palatal plane occurred. This suggests that adjunctive methods of vector control should be considered if clockwise (CW) rotation of the palatal plane is intended with the RED device.

Current Concepts in Prophylactic Antibiotics in Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery.

Antibiotic prophylaxis is the use of antibiotics in the perioperative period to prevent surgical site infections from local flora. Specific guidelines and criteria exist to prevent these infections while also practicing antimicrobial stewardship. Most dentoalveolar procedures do not require antibiotic prophylaxis. For nondentoalveolar procedures, the decision to provide antibiotic prophylaxis is based on involvement of the respiratory, oral, or pharyngeal mucosa. Special considerations exist for patients at high risk for infective endocarditis, patients with head and neck cancer, and temporomandibular joint replacement procedures. This article discusses indications for antibiotic prophylaxis during oral and maxillofacial surgical procedures.

Development of a Novel and Rapid Antibody-Based Diagnostic for Chronic Staphylococcus aureus Infections Based on Biofilm Antigens.

Prosthetic joint infections are difficult to diagnose and treat due to biofilm formation by the causative pathogens. Pathogen identification relies on microbial culture that requires days to weeks, and in the case of chronic biofilm infections, lacks sensitivity. Diagnosis of infection is often delayed past the point of effective treatment such that only the removal of the implant is curative. Early diagnosis of an infection based on antibody detection might lead to less invasive, early interventions. Our study examined antibody-based assays against the Staphylococcus aureus biofilm-upregulated antigens SAOCOL0486 (a lipoprotein), glucosaminidase (a domain of SACOL1062), and SACOL0688 (the manganese transporter MntC) for detection of chronic S. aureus infection. We evaluated these antigens by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) using sera from naive rabbits and rabbits with S. aureus-mediated osteomyelitis, and then we validated a proof of concept for the lateral flow assay (LFA). The SACOL0688 LFA demonstrated 100% specificity and 100% sensitivity. We demonstrated the clinical diagnostic utility of the SACOL0688 antigen using synovial fluid (SF) from humans with orthopedic implant infections. Elevated antibody levels to SACOL0688 in clinical SF specimens correlated with 91% sensitivity and 100% specificity for the diagnosis of S. aureus infection by ELISA. We found measuring antibodies levels to SACOL0688 in SF using ELISA or LFA provides a tool for the sensitive and specific diagnosis of S. aureus prosthetic joint infection. Development of the LFA diagnostic modality is a desirable, cost-effective option, potentially providing rapid readout in minutes for chronic biofilm infections.

Primary Oral Presentation of Sarcoidosis in a Pediatric Patient.

Sarcoidosis is a multisystem granulomatous disease of unknown etiology that commonly affects the lungs, lymph nodes, and skin. The disease often presents in patients between the third and sixth decade and its pathology is defined by the presence of noncaseating granulomas within organs throughout the body. Oral and neurologic involvement of sarcoid is extremely rare and occurs in approximately 1% and 5% of patients with the disease, respectively. A case of sarcoidosis involving the gingiva and submandibular lymph nodes is described in a 14-year-old girl. Further neural involvement of the disease was recognized after initial biopsy examinations and systemic evaluation. This presentation is especially rare given the patient's lack of symptoms, age at diagnosis, and initial oral manifestations.