Advertisement

Three-dimensional evaluation of distal and proximal segment skeletal relapse following isolated mandibular advancement surgery in 100 consecutive patients: A one-year follow-up study

  • S. Shujaat
    Correspondence
    Corresponding author at: OMFS-IMPATH Research Group, Campus Sint-Rafaël, Kapucijnenvoer 33, BE-3000 Leuven, Belgium.
    Affiliations
    OMFS-IMPATH Research Group, Department of Imaging and Pathology, Faculty of Medicine, KU Leuven and Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
    Search for articles by this author
  • E. Shaheen
    Affiliations
    OMFS-IMPATH Research Group, Department of Imaging and Pathology, Faculty of Medicine, KU Leuven and Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
    Search for articles by this author
  • C. Politis
    Affiliations
    OMFS-IMPATH Research Group, Department of Imaging and Pathology, Faculty of Medicine, KU Leuven and Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
    Search for articles by this author
  • R. Jacobs
    Affiliations
    OMFS-IMPATH Research Group, Department of Imaging and Pathology, Faculty of Medicine, KU Leuven and Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium

    Department of Dental Medicine, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
    Search for articles by this author
Published:April 19, 2021DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijom.2021.03.020

      Abstract

      The aim of this study was to perform a three-dimensional evaluation of the skeletal relapse of the proximal and distal mandibular segments following isolated bilateral sagittal split osteotomy advancement surgery. One hundred consecutive patients (mean age 25.8 ± 11.7 years), comprising 65 female patients (mean age 26.4 ± 12.1 years) and 35 male patients (mean age 24.6 ± 11.0 years) requiring mandibular advancement without genioplasty, were enrolled prospectively in the study. Cone beam computed tomography scans were acquired for each patient at three time-points: preoperatively, immediately (1–6 weeks) after surgery, and 1 year after surgery. A validated tool was utilized to assess the surgical movement and relapse. Based on percentage, the majority of the distal and proximal translational and rotational movements relapsed within the range of ≤2 mm and ≤2°. The distal segment revealed a significant relapse in a posterior, inferior, and clockwise pitch direction. Both left and right proximal segments showed a significant translational relapse in the medial, posterior, and superior direction. Amongst the rotational parameters, proximal segments relapsed significantly in clockwise pitch, clockwise roll, and counterclockwise yaw direction. Overall, both distal and proximal bone segments showed a clinically acceptable translational and rotational stability. The proximal segments torqued towards their original position with a reduction of flaring.

      Keywords

      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Monson L.A.
        Bilateral sagittal split osteotomy.
        Semin Plast Surg. 2013; 27: 145-148https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0033-1357111
        • Bailey L.T.J.
        • Cevidanes L.H.S.
        • Proffit W.R.
        Stability and predictability of orthognathic surgery.
        Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2004; 126: 273-277
        • Proffit W.R.
        • Turvey T.A.
        • Phillips C.
        The hierarchy of stability and predictability in orthognathic surgery with rigid fixation: an update and extension.
        Head Face Med. 2007; 3: 21https://doi.org/10.1186/1746-160X-3-21
        • Pangrazio-Kulbersh V.
        • Berger J.L.
        • Kaczynski R.
        • Shunock M.
        Stability of skeletal Class II correction with 2 surgical techniques: the sagittal split ramus osteotomy and the total mandibular subapical alveolar osteotomy.
        Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2001; 120: 134-143https://doi.org/10.1067/mod.2001.113792
        • Joss C.U.
        • Vassalli I.M.
        Stability after bilateral sagittal split osteotomy advancement surgery with rigid internal fixation: a systematic review.
        J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2009; 67: 301-313https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2008.06.060
        • Haas Junior O.L.
        • Guijarro-Martínez R.
        • de Sousa Gil A.P.
        • da Silva Meirelles L.
        • Scolari N.
        • Muñoz-Pereira M.E.
        • et al.
        Hierarchy of surgical stability in orthognathic surgery: overview of systematic reviews.
        Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2019; 48: 1415-1433https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijom.2019.03.003
        • Liebregts J.
        • Baan F.
        • van Lierop P.
        • de Koning M.
        • Bergé S.
        • Maal T.
        • et al.
        One-year postoperative skeletal stability of 3D planned bimaxillary osteotomies: maxilla-first versus mandible-first surgery.
        Sci Rep. 2019; 9: 1-9https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-39250-x
        • Xi T.
        • De Koning M.
        • Bergé S.
        • Hoppenreijs T.
        • Maal T.
        The role of mandibular proximal segment rotations on skeletal relapse and condylar remodelling following bilateral sagittal split advancement osteotomies.
        J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2015; 43: 1716-1722https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcms.2015.07.022
        • Yin Q.
        • Abotaleb B.
        • Bi R.
        • Zhu S.
        The quantitative correlation between condylar resorption and skeletal relapse following mandibular advancement in skeletal class II malocclusion patients.
        J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2020; 48: 839-844https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcms.2020.07.001
        • Baan F.
        • Liebregts J.
        • Xi T.
        • Schreurs R.
        • de Koning M.
        • Bergé S.
        • et al.
        A new 3D tool for assessing the accuracy of bimaxillary surgery: the OrthoGnathicanAlyser.
        PLoS One. 2016; 11: e0149625https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0149625
        • Gaber R.M.
        • Shaheen E.
        • Falter B.
        • Araya S.
        • Politis C.
        • Swennen G.R.
        • et al.
        A systematic review to uncover a universal protocol for accuracy assessment of 3-dimensional virtually planned orthognathic surgery.
        J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2017; 75: 2430-2440https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2017.05.025
        • Dolce C.
        • Hatch J.P.
        • Van Sickels J.E.
        • Rugh J.D.
        Rigid versus wire fixation for mandibular advancement: skeletal and dental changes after 5 years.
        Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2002; 121: 610-619https://doi.org/10.1067/mod.2002.123341
        • Eggensperger N.
        • Smolka K.
        • Luder J.
        • Iizuka T.
        Short- and long-term skeletal relapse after mandibular advancement surgery.
        Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2006; 35: 36-42https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijom.2005.04.008
        • Carvalho F.A.R.
        • Cevidanes L.H.S.
        • da Motta A.T.S.
        • de Oliveira Almeida M.A.
        • Phillips C.
        Three-dimensional assessment of mandibular advancement 1 year after surgery.
        Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2010; 137 (e1-S53.e12): S53https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2009.12.020
        • Motta A.T.
        • Cevidanes L.H.S.
        • Carvalho F.A.R.
        • Almeida M.A.O.
        • Phillips C.
        Three-dimensional regional displacements after mandibular advancement surgery: one year of follow-up.
        J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2011; 69: 1447-1457https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2010.07.018
        • Franco A.A.
        • Cevidanes L.H.
        • Phillips C.
        • Rossouw P.E.
        • Turvey T.A.
        • Felipe de Assis R.C.
        • et al.
        Long-term 3-dimensional stability of mandibular advancement surgery.
        J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2013; 71: 1588-1597https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2013.04.006
        • Hunsuck E.E.
        A modified intraoral sagittal splitting technic for correction of mandibular prognathism.
        J Oral Surg. 1968; 26: 250-253
        • Epker B.N.
        Modifications in the sagittal osteotomy of the mandible.
        J Oral Surg. 1977; 35: 157-159https://doi.org/10.1016/0300-5712(77)90037-9
        • Politis C.
        • Jacobs R.
        • De Laat A.
        • De Grauwe A.
        TMJ surgery following orthognathic surgery: a case series.
        Oral Maxillofac Surg Cases. 2018; 4: 39-52https://doi.org/10.1016/j.omsc.2018.02.003
        • Shaheen E.
        • Sun Y.
        • Jacobs R.
        • Politis C.
        Three-dimensional printed final occlusal splint for orthognathic surgery: design and validation.
        Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2017; 46: 67-71https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijom.2016.10.002
        • Tulasne J.F.
        • Schendel S.A.
        Transoral placement of rigid fixation following sagittal ramus split osteotomy.
        J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1989; 47: 651-652https://doi.org/10.1016/S0278-2391(89)80088-6
        • Stratis A.
        • Zhang G.
        • Lopez-Rendon X.
        • Politis C.
        • Hermans R.
        • Jacobs R.
        • et al.
        Two examples of indication specific radiation dose calculations in dental CBCT and multidetector CT scanners.
        Phys Med. 2017; 41: 71-77https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejmp.2017.03.027
        • Shujaat S.
        • Shaheen E.
        • Politis C.
        • Jacobs R.
        Accuracy and reliability of voxel-based dento-alveolar registration (VDAR) in orthognathic surgery patients: a pilot study with two years follow-up.
        Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2020; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjoms.2020.08.033
        • Shaheen E.
        • Shujaat S.
        • Saeed T.
        • Jacobs R.
        • Politis C.
        Three-dimensional planning accuracy and follow-up protocol in orthognathic surgery: a validation study.
        Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2019; 48: 71-76https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijom.2018.07.011
        • Verhelst P.J.
        • Shaheen E.
        • de Faria Vasconcelos K.
        • Van der Cruyssen F.
        • Shujaat S.
        • Coudyzer W.
        • et al.
        Validation of a 3D CBCT-based protocol for the follow-up of mandibular condyle remodeling.
        Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2020; 49: 20190364https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr.20190364
        • Schober P.
        • Schwarte L.A.
        Correlation coefficients: appropriate use and interpretation.
        Anesth Analg. 2018; 126: 1763-1768https://doi.org/10.1213/ANE.0000000000002864
        • Sahoo N.K.
        • Jayan B.
        • Thakral A.
        • Nagpal V.
        Skeletal relapse following sagittal split ramus osteotomy advancement.
        J Maxillofac Oral Surg. 2015; 14: 357-362https://doi.org/10.1007/s12663-014-0640-x
        • Valladares-Neto J.
        • Cevidanes L.H.
        • Rocha W.C.
        • Almeida G.D.A.
        • De Paiva J.B.
        • Rino-Neto J.
        TMJ response to mandibular advancement surgery: an overview of risk factors.
        J Appl Oral Sci. 2014; 22: 2-14https://doi.org/10.1590/1678-775720130056
        • Carlson D.S.
        • Ellis E.
        • Dechow P.C.
        Adaptation of the suprahyoid muscle complex to mandibular advancement surgery.
        Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1987; 92: 134-143https://doi.org/10.1016/0889-5406(87)90368-4
        • Schreuder W.H.
        • Jansma J.
        • Bierman M.W.J.
        • Vissink A.
        Distraction osteogenesis versus bilateral sagittal split osteotomy for advancement of the retrognathic mandible: a review of the literature.
        Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2007; 36: 103-110https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijom.2006.12.002
        • Borstlap W.A.
        • Stoelinga P.J.W.
        • Hoppenreijs T.J.M.
        • van’t Hof M.A.
        Stabilisation of sagittal split set-back osteotomies with miniplates: a prospective, multicentre study with 2-year follow-up.
        Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2005; 34: 487-494https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijom.2005.01.007
        • Joss C.U.
        • Thüer U.W.
        Stability of the hard and soft tissue profile after mandibular advancement in sagittal split osteotomies: a longitudinal and long-term follow-up study.
        Eur J Orthod. 2008; 30: 16-23https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjm080
        • Maal T.J.
        • de Koning M.J.
        • Plooij J.M.
        • Verhamme L.M.
        • Rangel F.A.
        • Bergé S.J.
        • et al.
        One year postoperative hard and soft tissue volumetric changes after a BSSO mandibular advancement.
        Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2012; 41: 1137-1145https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijom.2012.04.004
        • Chen S.
        • Lei J.
        • Wang X.
        • Fu K.Y.
        • Farzad P.
        • Yi B.
        Short- and long-term changes of condylar position after bilateral sagittal split ramus osteotomy for mandibular advancement in combination with Le Fort I osteotomy evaluated by cone-beam computed tomography.
        J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2013; 71: 1956-1966https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2013.06.213
        • Hasprayoon S.
        • Liao Y.F.
        Large versus small mandibular counterclockwise rotation during bimaxillary surgical correction of class II deformities – a retrospective CBCT study on skeletal stability.
        Clin Oral Invest. 2020; 24: 1779-1788https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-019-03040-6
        • Watzke I.M.
        • Turvey T.A.
        • Phillips C.
        • Proffit W.R.
        Stability of mandibular advancement after sagittal osteotomy with screw or wire fixation: a comparative study.
        J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1990; 48: 108-121https://doi.org/10.1016/S0278-2391(10)80197-1
        • Hoffmannová J.
        • Foltán R.
        • Vlk M.
        • Klíma K.
        • Pavlíková G.
        • Bulik O.
        Factors affecting the stability of bilateral sagittal split osteotomy of a mandible.
        Prague Med Rep. 2008; 109: 286-297
        • Proffit W.R.
        • Phillips C.
        • Turvey T.A.
        Long-term stability of adolescent versus adult surgery for treatment of mandibular deficiency.
        Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2010; 39: 327-332https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijom.2010.01.012
        • Tabrizi R.
        • Nili M.
        • Aliabadi E.
        • Pourdanesh F.
        Skeletal stability following mandibular advancement: is it influenced by the magnitude of advancement or changes of the mandibular plane angle?.
        J Korean Assoc Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2017; 43: 152-159https://doi.org/10.5125/jkaoms.2017.43.3.152