DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Three-dimensional morphometric analysis of mandibule in coronal plane after bimaxillary rotational surgery

  • Lee, Sung-Tak (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, School of Dentistry, Pusan National University) ;
  • Choi, Na-Rae (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, School of Dentistry, Pusan National University) ;
  • Song, Jae-Min (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, School of Dentistry, Pusan National University) ;
  • Shin, Sang-Hun (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, School of Dentistry, Pusan National University)
  • Received : 2016.10.01
  • Accepted : 2016.11.08
  • Published : 2016.12.31

Abstract

Background: The aim of this report is to present a new reference for aesthetic mandible surgery using three-dimensional cone-beam computed tomography-based treatment planning for orthognathic surgery which can be implemented in surgical planning and perioperative procedure. Methods: To make an objective standard for evaluating aesthetic mandibular outline, we make an aesthetic scoring criteria with consideration of asymmetry, broad mandibular border line, and prominent mandibular angle. Two maxillofacial surgeons and two orthodontists rated their aesthetical evaluation from 1 to 5. Experimental group consisting of 47 female and 38 male patients who had rotational orthognathic two-jaw surgery from 2010 to 2011 were chosen according to aesthetic scoring done by two maxillofacial surgeons and two orthodontists. A high aesthetic score (${\geq}16$) means the facial contour is symmetric, with no broad and narrow aesthetic mandible frontal profiles. Control A group consisted of ten female and ten male patients who had no orthognathic surgery experience and low aesthetic score (${\geq}10$). Control B group consisted of ten female and ten male patients who had no orthognathic surgery experience and had anaesthetic mandibular frontal profile and a high aesthetic score (${\geq}16$). The three-dimensional image of the patient was taken from dental cone-beam CT (DCT) scanning (experimental group and control A group: 6 months DCT after surgery, control B group: 1st visit DCT). Each DCT was reformatted to reorient the 3D image using 3D analyzing program (OnDemand3D, cybermed Inc, CA, USA). After selection of 12 landmarks and the construction of reoriented horizontal, vertical, and coronal reference lines, 15 measurements were taken in 3D analysis of frontal mandibular morphology. Afterwards, horizontal and vertical linear measurements and angular measurements, linear ratio were obtained. Results: Mean $Go^{\prime}_{Rt}-Me^{\prime}-Go^{\prime}_{Lt}$ angular measurement was $100.74{\pm}2.14$ in female patients and $105.37{\pm}3.62$ in male patients. These showed significant difference with control A group in both genders. Ratio of $Go^{\prime}_{Rt}-Go^{\prime}_{Lt}-Me^{\prime}$ length to some linear measurements (ratio of $Me^{\prime}-Cd^{\prime}_{Rt}Cd^{\prime}_{Lt}$ to $Me^{\prime}-Go^{\prime}_{Rt}Go^{\prime}_{Lt}$, ratio of $Me^{\prime}-Go^{\prime}$ to $Me^{\prime}-Go^{\prime}_{Rt}Go^{\prime}_{Lt}$, ratio of $Go^{\prime}_{Rt}-Go^{\prime}_{Lt}$ to $Me^{\prime}-Go^{\prime}_{Rt}Go^{\prime}_{Lt}$) showed significant difference with control A group in both genders. Conclusion: This study was intended to find some standard measurement of mandible frontal view in 3D analysis of aesthetic patient. So, these potential measurement value may be helpful for orthognathic treatment planning to have more aesthetic and perspective outcomes.

Keywords

References

  1. Enacar A, Taner T, Manav O (2001) Effects of single- or double-jaw surgery on vertical dimension in skeletal Class III patients. Int J Adult Orthodon Orthognath Surg 16:30-35
  2. Reyneke JP, Evans WG (1990) Surgical manipulation of the occlusal plane. Int J Adult Orthodon Orthognath Surg 5:99-110
  3. Wolford LM, Chemello PD, Hilliard F (1994) Occlusal plane alteration in orthognathic surgery-part I: effects on function and esthetics. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 106:304-316 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-5406(94)70051-6
  4. Proffit WR, Fields HW Jr, Ackerman JL (2000) Contemporary orthodontics, 3rd edn. Mosby, St Louis
  5. Athanasiou AE (1995) Orthodontic Cephaolmetry St Louis, Mosby-Wolfe
  6. Ishiguro K, Krogman WM, Mazaheri M, Harding RL (1976) A longitudinal study of morphological craniofacial patterns via P-A x-ray headfilms in cleft patients from birth to six years of age. Cleft Palate J 13:104-126
  7. Xia JJ, Gateno J, Teichgraeber JF (2009) New clinical protocol to evaluate craniomaxillofacial deformity and plan surgical correction. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 67:2093-2106 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2009.04.057
  8. Lee WD, Yoo CK, Choi JY (2010) Quantitative assessment of nasal and upper lip changes after Le Fort I osteotomy surgery using a 3-dimensional computed tomography. J Korean Assoc Maxillofac Plast Reconst Surg 32(s1):13-14
  9. Yoon HJ, Rebellato J, Keller EE (2005) Stability of the Le Fort I osteotomy with anterior internal fixation alone: a case series. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 63:629-634 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2004.12.013
  10. Kwon KY, Lee SH, Kwon DG (1999) Clinical articles : three dimensional analysis of maxillofacial structure by frontal and lateral cephalogram. J Korean Assoc Maxillofac Plast Reconst Surg 21:174-188
  11. Ghafari J, Cater PE, Shofer FS (1995) Effect of film-object distance on posteroanterior cephalometric measurements: suggestions for standardized cephalometric methods. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 108:30-37 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-5406(95)70063-3
  12. Yoon YJ, Kim DH, Yu PS, Kim HJ, Choi EH, Kim KW (2002) Effect of head rotation on posteroanterior cephalometric radiographs. Angle Orthod 72:36-42
  13. Grayson B, Cutting C, Bookstein FL, Kim H, McCarthy JG (1988) The three-dimensional cephalogram: theory, technique, and clinical application. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 94:327-337 https://doi.org/10.1016/0889-5406(88)90058-3
  14. Grayson BH, McCarthy JG, Bookstein F (1983) Analysis of craniofacial asymmetry by multiplane cephalometry. Am J Orthod 8:217-224
  15. Quevedo LA, Ruiz JV, Quevedo CA (2011) Using a clinical protocol for orthognathic surgery and assessing a 3-dimensional virtual approach: current therapy. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 69:623-637 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2010.11.009
  16. Orentlicher G, Goldsmith D, Horowitz A (2010) Applications of 3-dimensional virtual computerized tomography technology in oral and maxillofacial surgery: current therapy. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 68:1933-1959 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2010.03.013
  17. Gateno J, Xia JJ, Teichgraeber JF (2011) New 3-dimensional cephalometric analysis for orthognathic surgery. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 69:606-622 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2010.09.010
  18. Ellis E, McNamara J (1983) Cephalometric reference planes-sella nasion vs frankfort horizontal. Int J Adult Orthodon Orthognath Surg 3:81-87
  19. Sforza C, Peretta R, Grandi G, Ferronato G, Ferrario VF (2008) Soft tissue facial planes and masticatory muscle function in skeletal class III patients before and after orthognathic surgery treatment. J Oral MAxillofac Surg 66:691-698 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2007.06.645
  20. Almeida RC, Cevidanes LHS, Carvalho FAR, Motta AT, Almeida MAO, Styner M et al (2011) Soft tissue response to mandibular advancement using 3D CBCT scanning. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 40:353-359 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijom.2010.11.018
  21. Wolford LM, Hilliard FW, Dugan DJ (1985) Surgical Treatment Objective-a systematic approach to the prediction tracing. The C. V. Mosby Company
  22. Kim KH, Choy KC et al (2001) Cephalometric norms of the hard tissues of korean for orthognathic surgery. J Korean Assoc Oral Maxillofac Surg 27:221-230

Cited by

  1. Comparison of Lip Line Cant Change After 1-Jaw and 2-Jaw Surgery : vol.30, pp.6, 2019, https://doi.org/10.1097/scs.0000000000005556
  2. Use of an anatomical mid-sagittal plane for 3-dimensional cephalometry: A preliminary study vol.49, pp.2, 2019, https://doi.org/10.5624/isd.2019.49.2.159