TY - JOUR
T1 - Comparison between one-jaw and two-jaw designs in virtual surgery planning for patients with class III malocclusion
AU - Hattori, Yoshitsugu
AU - Pai, Betty Chien Jung
AU - Lo, Chi Chin
AU - Chou, Pang Yun
AU - Lo, Lun Jou
N1 - Copyright © 2024 European Association for Cranio-Maxillo-Facial Surgery. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
PY - 2024/5
Y1 - 2024/5
N2 - 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.
AB - 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.
KW - Class III malocclusion
KW - Facial esthetics
KW - One-jaw surgery
KW - Orthognathic surgery
KW - Two-jaw surgery
KW - Orthognathic Surgical Procedures/methods
KW - Imaging, Three-Dimensional/methods
KW - Humans
KW - Malocclusion, Angle Class III/surgery
KW - Mandible/surgery
KW - Male
KW - Cephalometry
KW - Young Adult
KW - Patient Care Planning
KW - Surgery, Computer-Assisted/methods
KW - Maxilla/surgery
KW - Adolescent
KW - Female
KW - Adult
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85186695213&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.jcms.2024.02.023
DO - 10.1016/j.jcms.2024.02.023
M3 - 文章
C2 - 38448337
AN - SCOPUS:85186695213
SN - 1010-5182
VL - 52
SP - 612
EP - 618
JO - Journal of Cranio-Maxillofacial Surgery
JF - Journal of Cranio-Maxillofacial Surgery
IS - 5
ER -