Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Comparison between one-jaw and two-jaw designs in virtual surgery planning for patients with class III malocclusion.
Hattori, Yoshitsugu; Pai, Betty Chien-Jung; Lo, Chi-Chin; Chou, Pang-Yun; Lo, Lun-Jou.
Affiliation
  • Hattori Y; Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery and Craniofacial Research Center, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Taoyuan, Taiwan.
  • Pai BC; Department of Craniofacial Orthodontics and Craniofacial Research Center, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Taoyuan, Taiwan.
  • Lo CC; Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery and Craniofacial Research Center, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Taoyuan, Taiwan.
  • Chou PY; Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery and Craniofacial Research Center, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Taoyuan, Taiwan; Graduate Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Science, Chang Gung University, Taoyuan, Taiwan.
  • Lo LJ; Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery and Craniofacial Research Center, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Taoyuan, Taiwan; Graduate Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Science, Chang Gung University, Taoyuan, Taiwan. Electronic address: lunjoulo@cgmh.org.tw.
J Craniomaxillofac Surg ; 52(5): 612-618, 2024 May.
Article in En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38448337
ABSTRACT
Orthognathic surgery is highly effective for treating maxillomandibular discrepancies in patients with class III malocclusion. However, whether one- or two-jaw surgery should be selected remains controversial. Our study aimed to evaluate quantitative differences between one-jaw and two-jaw surgical designs. In total, 100 consecutive patients with skeletal class III malocclusion who underwent orthognathic surgery with preoperative three-dimensional simulation between August 2016 and November 2021 were recruited. Based on the same final occlusal setup, a two-jaw surgery design and two types of one-jaw design were created. In total, 400 image sets, including preoperative images and three types of surgical simulation, were measured and compared. The one-jaw mandibular setback design led to improvement in most cephalometric measurements and facial symmetry. Although the one-jaw maxillary advancement design improved the ANB angle and facial convexity, it induced maxillary protrusion and reduced facial symmetry. Compared with the other designs, the two-jaw design provided significantly closer cephalometric measurements to the normative values, better symmetry, and less occlusal cant. Overall, the two-jaw design provided a quantitatively better facial appearance in terms of symmetry, proportion, and profile. Although an optimal surgical design necessitates thorough preoperative evaluation and a shared decision-making process, two-jaw surgery can be considered for improving overall facial esthetics and harmony.
Subject(s)
Key words

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Patient Care Planning / Cephalometry / Imaging, Three-Dimensional / Orthognathic Surgical Procedures / Malocclusion, Angle Class III Limits: Adolescent / Adult / Female / Humans / Male Language: En Journal: J Craniomaxillofac Surg Journal subject: ODONTOLOGIA Year: 2024 Document type: Article Affiliation country: Taiwán

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Patient Care Planning / Cephalometry / Imaging, Three-Dimensional / Orthognathic Surgical Procedures / Malocclusion, Angle Class III Limits: Adolescent / Adult / Female / Humans / Male Language: En Journal: J Craniomaxillofac Surg Journal subject: ODONTOLOGIA Year: 2024 Document type: Article Affiliation country: Taiwán