A comparison of fixation methods using three-dimensional finite element analysis following anterior segmental osteotomy

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to evaluate fixation methods and determine the best method for the postoperative stabilization of maxillary osteotomy. For our analysis we performed a three-dimensional finite element analysis of stress distribution on the plate, screw, and surrounding bone, as well as displacement onto the plate. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We generated a model using synthetic skull scan data; an initital surface model was changed to a solid model using software. Modified anterior segmental osteotomy (using Park's method) was made using the program, and four different types of fixation methods were used. An anterior load of 100 N was applied on the palatal surface of two central incisors. RESULTS: The Type 1 (L-shaped) fixation method gave stresses of 187.8 MPa at the plate, 45.8 MPa at the screw, and 15.4 MPa at the bone around the plate. The Type 2 (I-shaped) fixation method gave stresses of 186.6 MPa at the plate, 75.7 MPa at the screw, and 13.8 MPa at the bone around the plate. The Type 3 (inverted L-shaped) fixation method gave stresses of 28.6 MPa at the plate, 29.9 MPa at the screw, and 15.3 MPa at the bone around the plate. The Type 4 (I-shaped) fixation method gave stresses of 34.8 MPa at the plate, 36.9 MPa at the screw, and 14.9 MPa at the bone around the plate. The deflection of the plates for the four fixation methods was 0.014 mm, 0.022 mm, 0.017 mm, and 0.018 mm, respectively. CONCLUSION: The Type 3 (inverted L-shaped) fixation method offers more stability than the other fixation methods. We therefore recommend this method for the postoperative stabilization of maxillary osteotomy.

Three-dimensional finite element analysis of the stress distribution and displacement in different fixation methods of bilateral sagittal split ramus osteotomy

OBJECTIVES: This study evaluated a range of fixation methods to determine which is best for the postoperative stabilization of a mandibular osteotomy using three-dimensional finite element analysis of the stress distribution on the plate, screw and surrounding bone and displacement of the lower incisors. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The model was generated using the synthetic skull scan data, and the surface model was changed to a solid model using software. Bilateral sagittal split ramus osteotomy was performed using the program, and 8 different types of fixation methods were evaluated. A vertical load of 10 N was applied to the occlusal surface of the first molar. RESULTS: In the case of bicortical screws, von-Mises stress on the screws and screw hole and deflection of the lower central incisor were minimal in type 2 (inverted L pattern with 3 bicortical repositioning screws). In the case of plates, von-Mises stress was minimal in type 8 (fixation 5 mm above the inferior border of the mandible with 1 metal plate and 4 monocortical screws), and deflection of the lower central incisor was minimal in types 6 (fixation 5 mm below the superior border of the mandible with 1 metal plate and 4 monocortical screws) and 7 (fixation 12 mm below the superior border of the mandible with 1 metal plate and 4 monocortical screws). CONCLUSION: Types 2 and 6 fixation methods provide better stability than the others.