3.8 Article

Evaluation of postoperative changes in condylar positions after orthognathic surgery using balanced orthognathic surgery system

Journal

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1186/s40902-022-00341-x

Keywords

Orthognathic surgery; Condylar position; Accuracy; Virtual surgical planning

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study evaluated the changes in condylar positions after orthognathic surgery using virtual surgical planning via the BOS system. The results showed that the change mainly occurred downward in the y-axis, with slight changes in the x- and z-axes.
Background: Many studies on maintaining the condyle in a normal or anatomical position during orthognathic surgery have been conducted to stabilize surgical outcomes and prevent iatrogenic temporomandibular joint complications. The aim of this study is to evaluate the changes in condylar positions after orthognathic surgery using virtual surgical planning via the balanced orthognathic surgery (BOS) system. Methods: Postoperative changes in condylar position were retrospectively evaluated in 22 condyles of 11 patients with skeletal class III malocclusion who underwent orthognathic surgery using virtual surgical planning via the BOS system. The center point coordinates of the condylar head before and after orthognathic surgery were analyzed using voxel-based registration. Results: Changes in the condylar position mainly occurred downward in the y-axis (-1.09 +/- 0.62 mm) (P < 0.05). The change in the x-axis (0.02 +/- 0.68 mm) and z-axis (0.01 +/- 0.48 mm) showed no significant difference between before and after orthognathic surgery. Conclusion: These results indicate that the changes in the condylar positions after orthognathic surgery using virtual surgical planning via the BOS system mainly occurred downward in the y-axis, with slight changes in the x- and z-axes. The change in the condylar position after orthognathic surgery using the BOS system is clinically acceptable.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available