• Journal of the Korean Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons
• /
• v.48 no.1
• /
• pp.63-67
• /
• 2022

Controversies exist regarding the need for prophylactic extraction of mandibular third molars in patients who plan to undergo orthognathic surgery. An 18-year-old male patient was diagnosed with mandibular prognathism and maxillary retrognathism with mild facial asymmetry. He had a severely damaged mandibular first molar and a horizontally impacted third molar. After extraction of the first molar, the second molar was protracted into the first molar space, and the third molar erupted into the posterior line of occlusion. The orthognathic surgery involved clockwise rotation of the maxillomandibular complex as well as angle shaving and chin border trimming. Patients who are missing or have damaged mandibular molars should be monitored for eruption of third molars to replace the missing posterior tooth regardless of the timing of orthognathic surgery.

• Maxillofacial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery
• /
• v.28 no.1
• /
• pp.73-79
• /
• 2006

The management of mandibular prognathism and retrognathism was revoluted by the advent of the technique of bilateral sagittal split ramus osteotomy(BSSRO) as described by Obwegeser and Trauner in 1957. The BSSRO of the mandible has been used for nearly 50 years and has undergone numerous modifications and improvements. Most patients, treated by this surgical operation, express their satisfaction with improved facial esthetics, masticatory function and others. But several complications associated with BSSRO may appear. Especially among them, facial nerve palsy following BSSRO is rare but serious problem. We treated for facial nerve palsy following BSSRO by physical therapy, steroid therapy and surgical intervention and then the result was favorable. Therefore we would like to report a case about a patient with facial nerve palsy after BSSRO with a review of the literatures.

• Journal of the Korean Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons
• /
• v.34 no.4
• /
• pp.460-467
• /
• 2008

Pierre Robin sequence as a symptom triad of micrognathia, glossoptosis, and cleft palate results in upper airway obstruction and feeding problems. If mild, it is often managed in the prone position. When positional treatment fails, however, surgical intervention such as tongue-lip adhesion, tracheostomy, and mandibular distraction osteogenesis is mandatory to relieve airway obstruction. There has been growing interest in the application of distraction osteogenesis for the management of craniofacial abnormalities. The mandibular distraction osteogenesis to newborns may prevent the airway obstruction, decrease the potential tracheostomy, and reduce the likehood of orthognathic surgery after growth. We experienced an infant with Pierre Robin sequence who showed mandibular hypoplasia, glossoptosis, incomplete cleft palate, intermittent cyanos is, depression of the chest, and respiratory difficulty associated with airway obstruction. We treated the airway obstruction by tongue-lip adhesion at 2 weeks of age, and treated the mandibular retrognathism and depression of the chest byusing internal mandibular distraction osteogenesis at 7 month of age. The mandible moved forwardly, the upper airway space was enlarged, and the antero-posterior distance of the mandible was elongated after the mandibular distraction. Mandibular distraction osteogenesis may be a promising technique to avoid the need of tracheostomy and orthognathic surgery, and to correct airway obstruction in infants with congenital craniofacial malformation.

• The korean journal of orthodontics
• /
• v.49 no.1
• /
• pp.49-58
• /
• 2019

Objective: The aim of this retrospective study was to evaluate and compare the changes in the pharyngeal airway (PA), maxillary sinus volume, and skeletal parameters after rapid maxillary expansion (RME) and alternate rapid maxillary expansion and constriction (Alt-RAMEC) followed by facemask (FM) therapy. Methods: The records of 40 patients with skeletal Class III malocclusion due to maxillary retrognathism were collected, and the patients were assigned into two groups. The first group comprised 8 male and 12 female patients (mean age, $10.0{\pm}1.1years$) treated using RME/FM for an average of 10 months. The second group comprised 10 male and 10 female patients (mean age, $9.64{\pm}1.3years$) treated using Alt-RAMEC/FM for an average of 12 months. Cone-beam computed tomography images acquired before (T0) and after treatment (T1) were evaluated. Results: Regarding the skeletal effects, significant differences between the groups were the increase in ANS-HRP (perpendicular distance of ANS to the horizontal reference plane, 0.99 mm, p <0.05) in the Alt-RAMEC/FM group and the decrease in PP-SN (palatal plane to Sella-Nasion plane, $0.93^{\circ}$, p < 0.05) in the RME/FM group. Maxillary sinus volumes increased significantly in both the groups, and the increase was statistically significantly higher in the Alt-RAMEC/FM group. Although no significant intergroup differences were observed in PA volumes, both lower ($1,011.19mm^3$) and total ($1,601.21mm^3$), PA volume increased significantly in the Alt-RAMEC/FM group. Conclusions: The different expansion devices and protocols used with FM therapy do not seem to affect the forward movement of the maxilla and PA volumes. In contrast, the increase in maxillary sinus volume was greater in the Alt-RAMEC/FM protocol.

• Journal of the Korean Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons
• /
• v.27 no.3
• /
• pp.193-203
• /
• 2001

Orthognathic surgery of the mandibular prognathism and the retrognathism is tend to be performed on the mandibular ramus to prevent inferor alveolar nerve injuries. The purpose of this study is to find a safe and accurate reference point on mandibular ramus for orthognathic surgery by comparative anatomical study of dentofacial deformity patients. We use 38 Korean Cadavers with normal occlusion(Group 1), 3-dimensional simulation of computerized tomogram of 23 patients with retrognathism (Group 2), 27 patients with mandibular prognathism (Group 3). Following results are obtained : 1. The maximum thickness of the mandibular ramus is $8.78{\pm}1.15mm$ for Group 2, $7.61{\pm}1.26mm$ for Group 1, $6.95{\pm}0.82mm$ for Group3 respectively (P=0001). The minimum thickness is $5.51{\pm}1.08mm$ for Group 1, $5.06{\pm}0.40mm$ for Group 2, $4.56{\pm}0.78mm$ for Group3, respectively (p=0.0001). But, the thickness at the level of 5mm above the lingular is $0.78{\pm}0.65mm$ for Group 2, $5.63{\pm}1.28mm$ for Group 1, $5.32{\pm}0.91mm$ for Group 3, respectively. There is no significant difference between these groups(P=0.0510). 2. The horizontal location from the midwaist point to lingular is $0.18{\pm}1.57mm$ for Group 1, $0.69{\pm}1.33mm$ for Group 2, $0.66{\pm}1.66mm$ for Group 3, and there is no significant difference between these groups(p=0.0835). But the vertical location from the midwaist point to lingular is $1.45{\pm}2.64mm$ for Group 1, $0.63{\pm}1.44mm$ for Group 2, $0.34{\pm}1.81mm$ for Group 3, and there is significant difference between these groups(p=0.0030). 3. The horizontal location from the midwaist point to mandibular foramen is $0.29{\pm}1.75mm$ for Group 1, $0.63{\pm}1.44mm$ for Group 2, $0.34{\pm}1.81mm$ for Group 3, and there is no significant difference between these groups(p=0.5403). But the vertical location from the midwaist point to mandibular foramen is $-3.33{\pm}4.43mm$ for Group1, $-4.79{\pm}2.26mm$ for Group 2, $-6.06{\pm}2.99mm$ for Group 3, and there is significant difference between these groups(P=0.0001). 4. The horizontal length from the disto-buccal cusp tip of mandibular second molar to lingula is $30.97{\pm}4.17mm$ for Group 3, $28.29{\pm}2.65mm$ for Group 1, $25.48{\pm}0.77mm$ for Group 2 (p=0.0000), and also vertical length is $7.72{\pm}3.22mm$ for Group 3, $6.38{\pm}1.83mm$ for Group 1, $5.89{\pm}2.30mm$ for Group 2 (P=0.0014). 5. The location of lingular is 0.50 from anterior border of mandibular ramus in all groups, if it assumed the length from anterior border to posterior border is 1. And it is almost 0.33 from the sigmoid notch, if it assumed the length from sigmoid notch to antegonial notch is 1. 6. In Group 1, Antilingular prominence is located on ($1.12{\pm}1.43mm,\;4.01{\pm}2.36mm$) from the midwaist point, and there is no correlation between antilingular prominence and lingular, mandibular foramen.

• Maxillofacial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery
• /
• v.32 no.2
• /
• pp.141-148
• /
• 2010

The bilateral sagittal split ramus osteotomy (BSSRO) is preferred method of surgical correction for mandibular prognathism, retrognathism and asymmetry. This technique performed from primarily an intraoral incision to avoid a scar. After forward movement of the distal segment of the mandible, healing of bone by primary or secondary intention is easily accomplished through large areas of cancellous bony overlap. When rigid fixation is used for the BSSRO, it is possible to open the mouth during the immediate post-operative period because it promotes the healing process. Although this surgical procedure has been well-documented, the incidence of postoperative trigeminal neurosensory disorder in the region of the inferior alveolar nerve and the mental nerve remains one of the major complication. However, evaluation of objective methods for sensory recovery patterns is insufficient although most patients find their sensory return. Neurometer electrodiagnostic device performs automated neuroselective sensory nerve conduction threshold evaluation by determining current perception threshold (CPT) measures. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the sensory recovery patterns of inferior alveolar and mental nerve over time. Nerve examination with a neurometer was performed in 30 patients undergoing the BSSRO at pre-operative, post-operative 1-, 2-, 4- week, and 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6- month follow-up visits after the osteotomy to compare the differences of nerve injury and recovery patterns after the BSSRO with or without genioplasty and sensory recovery patterns associated with the kind of nerve fiber.

• Maxillofacial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery
• /
• v.29 no.3
• /
• pp.217-226
• /
• 2007

Purpose: Distraction osteogenesis is considered to take favorable effect on the TMJ and be beneficial to prevent the relapse after the mandibular advancement of Class II malocclusion patient. This is the report with literature review on the mandibular advancement in the patients showing preoperative condylar resorption and who need larger amount of advancement. Patients and method: Distraction osteogenesis using intraoral device was performed for three mandibular hypoplasia patients (one male and two females). All patients were adult over 18 years old. The patients showed condylar bony resorption preoperatively. The distraction was performed intraorally with modified SSRO. After 7 days of latency period, activation was performed at the rate of 1.0 mm/day with twice turn. The devices were removed after 4-8 month consolidation period. Results: Total advancement of mandible was average 13 mm. One patient showed openbite immediately after removal of distraction device. It took long time to guide the openbite with elastics. The comparison between cephalometries immediately after device removal and postoperative six month revealed average 3.4 mm relapse. This means that mandibular advancement with distraction osteogenesis needs overcorrection and elastic rehabilitation even after enough consolidation periods. Conclusion: Larger amount of mandibular advancement could be achieved with distraction osteogenesis in severe mandibular hypoplasia with condylar resorption. However, some relapse was found during the follow-up period and the over correction is considered to be needed. The effect of distraction osteogenesis seems to be investigated with long-term follow-up.