• 대한두개안면성형외과학회지
• /
• 제23권4호
• /
• pp.152-162
• /
• 2022

Background: The efficacy and safety of equine cartilage as a competent xenograft material for rhinoplasty were evaluated and compared to the outcomes of rhinoplasty using silicone implants. Methods: We performed a multicenter, double-blind, non-inferiority, and randomized confirmatory study. Fifty-six patients were randomized 1:1 to the study group (using MegaCartilage-E) and control group (using silicone implants). The Rhinoplasty Outcome Evaluation (ROE) score, photo documentation, Global Aesthetic Improvement Scale (GAIS), and adverse event data were obtained until 12 months after surgery. The primary efficacy, which is the change in ROE score 6 months after surgery, was assessed in the modified intention-to-treat set. The secondary efficacy was evaluated in the per-protocol set by assessing the change in ROE score 6 and 12 months after surgery and nasofrontal angle, the height of the nasion, and GAIS 1, 6, and 12 months after surgery. Results: The change in ROE score of the study group was non-inferior to that of the control group; it increased by 24.26±17.24 in the study group and 18.27±17.60 in the control group (p= 0.213). In both groups, all secondary outcome measures increased, but there was no statistical difference. In the safety set, treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in 10 patients (35.71%) in the study group and six patients (21.43%) in the control group (p= 0.237). There were 13 adverse device events in the study group and six adverse device events in the control group (p= 0.515). Conclusion: Processed equine cartilage can be used effectively and safely as xenograft material for rhinoplasty.

• 대한치과교정학회지
• /
• 제54권2호
• /
• pp.79-88
• /
• 2024

Objective: Alveolar bone loss is a common adverse effect of intrusion treatment. Mandibular incisors are prone to dehiscence and fenestrations as they suffer from thinner alveolar bone thickness. Methods: Thirty skeletal class II patients treated with mandibular intrusion arch therapy were included in this study. Lateral cephalograms and cone-beam computed tomography images were taken before treatment (T1) and immediately after intrusion arch removal (T2) to evaluate the tooth displacement and the alveolar bone changes. Pearson's and Spearman's correlation was used to identify risk factors of alveolar bone loss during the intrusion treatment. Results: Deep overbite was successfully corrected (P < 0.05), accompanied by mandibular incisor proclination (P < 0.05). There were no statistically significant change in the true incisor intrusion (P > 0.05). The labial and lingual vertical alveolar bone levels showed a significant decrease (P < 0.05). The alveolar bone is thinning in the labial crestal area and lingual apical area (P < 0.05); accompanied by thickening in the labial apical area (P < 0.05). Proclined incisors, non-extraction treatment, and increased A point-nasion-B point (ANB) degree were positively correlated with alveolar bone loss. Conclusions: While the mandibular intrusion arch effectively corrected the deep overbite, it did cause some unwanted incisor labial tipping/flaring. During the intrusion treatment, the alveolar bone underwent corresponding changes, which was thinning in the labial crestal area and thickening in the labial apical area vice versa. And increased axis change of incisors, non-extraction treatment, and increased ANB were identified as risk factors for alveolar bone loss in patients with mandibular intrusion therapy.