Journal of the Korean Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons

The Korean Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons (대한구강악안면외과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Positional changes of the mandibular condyle in unilateral sagittal split ramus osteotomy combined with intraoral vertical ramus osteotomy for asymmetric class III malocclusion

  • Park, Jun (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, College of Medicine, Dong-A University) ;
  • Hong, Ki-Eun (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, College of Medicine, Dong-A University) ;
  • Yun, Ji-Eon (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, College of Medicine, Dong-A University) ;
  • Shin, Eun-Sup (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, College of Medicine, Dong-A University) ;
  • Kim, Chul-Hoon (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, College of Medicine, Dong-A University) ;
  • Kim, Bok-Joo (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, College of Medicine, Dong-A University) ;
  • Kim, Jung-Han (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, College of Medicine, Dong-A University)
  • Received : 2021.08.18
  • Accepted : 2021.10.06
  • Published : 2021.10.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Objectives: In the present study, the effects of sagittal split ramus osteotomy (SSRO) combined with intraoral vertical ramus osteotomy (IVRO) for the treatment of asymmetric mandible in class III malocclusion patients were assessed and the postoperative stability of the mandibular condyle and the symptoms of temporomandibular joint disorder (TMD) evaluated. Materials and Methods: A total of 82 patients who underwent orthognathic surgery for the treatment of facial asymmetry or mandibular asymmetry at the Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Dong-A University Hospital, from 2016 to 2021 were selected. The patients that underwent SSRO with IVRO were assigned to Group I (n=8) and patients that received bilateral SSRO (BSSRO) to Group II (n=10, simple random sampling). Preoperative and postoperative three-dimensional computed tomography (CT) axial images obtained for each group were superimposed. The condylar position changes and degree of rotation on the superimposed images were measured, and the changes in condyle based on the amount of chin movement for each surgical method were statistically analyzed. Results: Group I showed a greater amount of postoperative chin movement. For the amount of mediolateral condylar displacement on the deviated side, Groups I and II showed an average lateral displacement of 0.07 mm and 1.62 mm, respectively, and statistically significantly correlated with the amount of chin movement (P=0.004). Most of the TMD symptoms in Group I patients who underwent SSRO with IVRO showed improvement. Conclusion: When a large amount of mandibular rotation is required to match the menton to the midline of the face, IVRO on the deviated side is considered a technique to prevent condylar torque. In the present study, worsening of TMD symptoms did not occur after orthognathic surgery in any of the 18 patients.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

This work was supported by the Dong-A University research fund.

References

  1. Ellis E 3rd. A method to passively align the sagittal ramus osteotomy segments. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2007;65:2125-30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2007.02.005
  2. Ghali GE, Sikes JW Jr. Intraoral vertical ramus osteotomy as the preferred treatment for mandibular prognathism. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2000;58:313-5. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0278-2391(00)90063-6
  3. Trauner R, Obwegeser H. The surgical correction of mandibular prognathism and retrognathia with consideration of genioplasty. II. Operating methods for microgenia and distoclusion. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1957;10:899-909. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0030-4220(57)80041-3
  4. Spiessl B. [Osteosynthesis in sagittal osteotomy using the Obwegeser-Dal Pont method]. Fortschr Kiefer Gesichtschir 1974;18:145-8. German.
  5. Watzke IM, Heinrich A. The impact of bilateral sagittal split osteotomy on mandibular width and morphology. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2002;60:502-4; discussion 505. https://doi.org/10.1053/joms.2002.31845
  6. Proffit RP, White PJ. Surgical-orthodontics treatment. St. Louis: Mosby; 1990.
  7. Steinhauser EW. Historical development of orthognathic surgery. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 1996;24:195-204. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1010-5182(96)80002-3
  8. Jung HD, Jung YS, Park HS. The chronologic prevalence of temporomandibular joint disorders associated with bilateral intraoral vertical ramus osteotomy. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2009;67:797-803. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2008.11.003
  9. Rotskoff KS, Herbosa EG, Nickels B. Correction of condylar displacement following intraoral vertical ramus osteotomy. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1991;49:366-72; discussion 373-4. https://doi.org/10.1016/0278-2391(91)90372-s
  10. Onizawa K, Schmelzeisen R, Vogt S. Alteration of temporomandibular joint symptoms after orthognathic surgery: comparison with healthy volunteers. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1995;53:117-21; discussion 122-3. https://doi.org/10.1016/0278-2391(95)90383-6
  11. Wolford LM, Reiche-Fischel O, Mehra P. Changes in temporomandibular joint dysfunction after orthognathic surgery. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2003;61:655-60; discussion 661. https://doi.org/10.1053/joms.2003.50131
  12. Lee JH, Park TJ, Jeon JH. Unilateral intraoral vertical ramus osteotomy and sagittal split ramus osteotomy for the treatment of asymmetric mandibles. J Korean Assoc Oral Maxillofac Surg 2015;41:102-8. https://doi.org/10.5125/jkaoms.2015.41.2.102
  13. Panula K, Finne K, Oikarinen K. Incidence of complications and problems related to orthognathic surgery: a review of 655 patients. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2001;59:1128-36; discussion 1137. https://doi.org/10.1053/joms.2001.26704
  14. Hwang SJ, Haers PE, Zimmermann A, Oechslin C, Seifert B, Sailer HF. Surgical risk factors for condylar resorption after orthognathic surgery. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2000;89:542-52. https://doi.org/10.1067/moe.2000.105239
  15. Dujoncquoy JP, Ferri J, Raoul G, Kleinheinz J. Temporomandibular joint dysfunction and orthognathic surgery: a retrospective study. Head Face Med 2010;6:27. https://doi.org/10.1186/1746-160X-6-27
  16. Al-Moraissi EA, Wolford LM, Perez D, Laskin DM, Ellis E 3rd. Does orthognathic surgery cause or cure temporomandibular disorders? A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2017;75:1835-47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2017.03.029
  17. Jung HD, Kim SY, Park HS, Jung YS. Orthognathic surgery and temporomandibular joint symptoms. Maxillofac Plast Reconstr Surg 2015;37:14. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40902-015-0014-4
  18. Kang MG, Yun KI, Kim CH, Park JU. Postoperative condylar position by sagittal split ramus osteotomy with and without bone graft. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2010;68:2058-64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2009.12.015
  19. Ueki K, Degerliyurt K, Hashiba Y, Marukawa K, Nakagawa K, Yamamoto E. Horizontal changes in the condylar head after sagittal split ramus osteotomy with bent plate fixation. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2008;106:656-61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tripleo.2008.03.016
  20. Yang HJ, Hwang SJ. Change in condylar position in posterior bending osteotomy minimizing condylar torque in BSSRO for facial asymmetry. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 2014;42:325-32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcms.2013.05.021
  21. Epker BN, Stella JP, Fish LC. Dentofacial deformities: integrated orthodontic and surgical correction. 2nd ed. St. Louis: Mosby; 1999.
  22. Naran S, Steinbacher DM, Taylor JA. Current concepts in orthognathic surgery. Plast Reconstr Surg 2018;141:925e-36e. https://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0000000000004438