Surgical morbidities of sagittal split ramus osteotomy versus intraoral vertical ramus osteotomy for the correction of mandibular prognathism: a randomized clinical trial

Avoiding Inferior Alveolar Nerve Injury During Sagittal Split Ramus Osteotomy

Orthognathic surgery is highly effective in improving overall facial esthetics, in addition to achieving an ideal occlusion. Sagittal split ramus osteotomy (SSRO) of the mandible is the mainstay of modern orthognathic surgery, but intraoperative injury to the inferior alveolar nerve (IAN) remains one of the common complications. The authors report a case of 19-year-old male patient with left cleft lip and palate who received orthognathic surgery involving SSRO. The patient's right IAN ran close to the outer cortex of the mandible, but SSRO was successfully performed without injuring the nerve. Detailed preoperative evaluation using computed tomography images is essential. Blind splitting maneuvers during SSRO may cause IAN injury, and direct visualization inside the ramus helps to prevent injury to the nerve. Sagittal split ramus osteotomy could be considered as a viable option even when the IAN runs close to the outer cortex. This article describes SSRO procedures, highlighting the methods to avoid nerve injury.

Comparison of the quality of life changes of patients receiving sagittal split ramus osteotomy or intraoral vertical subsigmoid osteotomy for mandibular prognathism

OBJECTIVE

To investigate and compare the effect of two orthognathic procedures for mandibular setback, namely, sagittal split ramus osteotomy (SSRO) and intraoral vertical ramus osteotomy (IVRO), on oral health, mental- and physical health-related quality of life across time.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients with mandibular prognathism and planned for orthognathic surgery were recruited in this study. Patients were randomized into two groups (IVRO and SSRO groups). Quality of life (QoL) was assessed with the 14-item Short-Form Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP-14) and the 36-item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) preoperatively (T₀), postoperative 2 weeks (T₁), 6 weeks (T₂), 3 months (T₃), 6 months (T₄), 12 months (T₅), and 24 months (T₆). A comparison of OHIP-14 and SF-36 scores between two groups was conducted.

RESULTS

Ninety-eight patients (49 SSRO group, 49 IVRO group) participated in this study. There was no significant difference in OHIP-14 scores between SSRO and IVRO throughout the treatment process. SSRO group had significant reduction of OHIP-14 score (i.e., improving oral health-related QoL) since postoperative 2 weeks, whereas IVRO group had significant reduction since postoperative 6 weeks. Starting from postoperative 3 months, the oral health-related QoL of both groups was already significantly better than the baseline level and continued to steadily improve afterwards. For SF-36, both groups had increased physical health summary score starting from postoperative 2 weeks, indicating an early and gradual recovery of physical health-related QoL. The mental health summary score of the SSRO group began to increase from postoperative 2 weeks, but that of the IVRO group only began to increase from postoperative 6 weeks. Patient age at the time of surgery was positively correlated with OHIP scores in the postoperative period.

CONCLUSIONS

The study concludes that both SSRO and IVRO contributed to the improvement of QoL in the long term, but oral health- and mental health-related QoL of SSRO groups showed earlier improvement.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Undergoing orthognathic surgery at early ages is advised, as older age of patients appeared to have worse QoL.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinical trial registration number: HKUCTR-1985. Date of Registration: 14 Apr 2015.

An Anatomical Study of Dry Mandibles to Determine the Important Surgical Reference Points in Ramus Osteotomy - An Evaluative Study

Introduction

The variable relation and clinical significance of mandibular foramen (MF) and Lingula with inferior alveolar neurovascular bundle (IANB) is important for dental surgeons. Knowing the landmarks on the ramus of the mandible is of paramount importance to perform the surgery without causing damage to the neurovascular bundle.

Materials and Methods

This study was conducted on 85 dry adult mandibles of unknown sex and age. The distances were measured from the anatomical reference points (anti-Lingula, Lingula and MF) using digital callipers.

Results

The distance from the anti-Lingula to the anterior border of the ramus (A) was significantly longer on the right side (14.91 mm) than on the left side (14.5 mm). There was a significant difference in mean distances between the anti-Lingula and MF of both the sides (P ≤ 0.005). No significant difference was noted in the distances between the Lingula and the Anti-Lingula, observed for the posterior (B, P = 0.75) and the inferior margin of the mandible (D, P = 0.54). However we found correlation of vertical distances of anti-Lingula with Lingula and MF exhibited moderate positive correlation.

Discussion

The IANB is prone to damage during mandibular surgery. Using anti-Lingula alone as a reference point is not guaranteed, but it is still an important anatomical landmark for the surgeon to operate.

Mandibular asymmetry: Is there a difference in the bone and soft tissue thickness between both sides?

OBJECTIVE

The asymmetric mandible presents the clinician with unique anatomic challenges in orthognathic surgery correction. This study aims to investigate these characteristics of the asymmetric mandible: mandible bone thickness, soft tissue thickness, and the proximity of the bone cortex to the inferior alveolar nerve (IAN) canal.

STUDY DESIGN

Three-dimensional virtual models were created of 35 participants of Asian descent with mandibular asymmetry. Mandibular bone thicknesses and soft tissue thicknesses were measured at certain landmarks. Statistical analysis of the thicknesses of both sides of the mandible was performed. Comparison of thicknesses between patients with minor and major asymmetry were also performed.

RESULTS

The bone was significantly thinner at the longer side at all 4 mandible landmarks (P < .001). The bone lateral to the IAN was significantly thinner at the longer side, as well (P < .001). The soft tissue thickness did not differ significantly across sides, except at 1 landmark. These findings were even more exaggerated in the major asymmetry group.

CONCLUSIONS

The longer side of the asymmetric mandible bone was thinner, and the bone lateral to the IAN was also thinner as a result. This asymmetric thinness was exaggerated in patients with severe asymmetry, which may predispose the longer side to IAN injury and unfavorable fractures. The differences in bone thickness in the asymmetric mandible may also result in residual postoperative asymmetry.

The Versatility of Extraoral Vertical Ramus Osteotomy for Mandibular Prognathism: A Prospective Study

INTRODUCTION

Orthognathic surgery simply means alignment of the jaws. The aim of orthognathic surgery is to normalize the relationship of the jaws between themselves and the rest of the craniofacial complex. Mandibular prognathism is a common clinical problem all over the world. Currently, sagittal ramus osteotomy is the primary choice for correcting most cases of mandibular retrognathism and prognathism. The surgical option for extreme cases of mandibular prognathism is extraoral vertical ramus osteotomy (EVRO) or intraoral vertical ramus osteotomy (IVRO) or inverted L osteotomy.

AIM

The aim of this study was to evaluate the versatility of EVRO for mandibular prognathism.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Ten patients with the chief complaint of mandibular prognathism with no history of keloid tendency were included in the study. EVRO was done for all patients. The parameters based on which the outcome of the surgical procedure was assessed were time taken for the surgical procedure, facial harmony both in frontal and profile views postoperatively, and intraoperative and postoperative complications, and assessment of the postoperative results was done through orthopantomogram (OPG) and 3D CT scan.

RESULTS

The time taken for the entire surgical procedure, starting from incision to closure, varied between 80 and 94 minutes with the average time taken for the surgery being 90 ± 8.80 minutes. It was found that there was a statistically significant difference between preoperative (M = 53.4, SD = 5.854) and postoperative evaluation (M = 47.5, SD = 5.039) of the posterior nasal spine to nasion 1 (PNS-N 1) horizontal plane (HP) (mm) with p < 0.001. Similarly, there was a statistically significant difference between preoperative (M = 81.4, SD = 2.716) and postoperative evaluation (M = 74.4, SD = 3.627) of mandible body length (mm) with p < 0.001. However, no statistically significant difference exists between the preoperative and postoperative evaluation of anterior nasal spine (ANS) to PNS (mm) and ramus height Ar-Go (mm).

CONCLUSION

EVRO is an acceptable surgical procedure owing to the fact that it is relatively simple to carry out, its lack of complications, and its good results.

Diagnosis and Treatment of Myogenous Temporomandibular Disorders: A Clinical Update

Myogenous temporomandibular disorders (M-TMDs) are the most common chronic orofacial pain, affecting the masticatory muscles and, thus, jaw movement. While a concise diagnosis is crucial to formulate a rational treatment plan, the similarities in clinical presentations that M-TMDs share with other neuromuscular disorders affecting the temporomandibular joint (TMJ) could easily confuse physicians. In addition to the basics, such as thorough history taking and meticulous clinical examinations, different imaging techniques are useful adjuncts to facilitate the diagnostic process. This review presents an overview of the current understanding on a variety of diagnostic and treatment modalities for M-TMD patients. It is essential to highlight that there is not a single treatment for all, and the benefits of multidisciplinary strategies have been noted for the effective management of myogenous TMD pain. Treatment modalities ranging from conservative to minimally invasive options are discussed in this review.

Vertical Ramus Osteotomy, Is It Still a Valid Tool in Orthognathic Surgery?

The purpose of this study is to evaluate mandibular osteotomy procedures during orthognathic surgery, with an emphasis on the complications of the two leading procedures: intraoral vertical ramus osteotomy (IVRO) and sagittal split osteotomy (SSO). We conducted a retrospective cohort study by extracting the records of patients who underwent either IVRO or SSO procedures during orthognathic surgery in a single center between January 2010 and December 2019. A total of 144 patients were included (median age of 20.5 years, 52 males). The IVRO:SSO ratio was 118:26 procedures. When referring to all surgeries performed, IVRO procedures were associated with shorter hospitalization than the SSO procedures, while the overall durations of surgery and follow-up periods were comparable. In contrast, when referring only to bimaxillary procedures, the duration of the IVRO bimaxillary procedures was significantly shorter than the SSO bimaxillary procedures. There were 53 complications altogether. Postoperative complications consisting of skeletal relapse, temporomandibular joint dysfunction, sensory impairment, and surgical-site infection were significantly fewer in the IVRO group. Both types of osteotomies have acceptable rates of complications. IVRO appears to be a safer, simpler, though less acceptable procedure in terms of patient compliance.

Biomechanical Evaluation of Seven Fixation Methods for Sagittal Split Ramus Osteotomy with Four Advancement Levels by Finite Element Analysis

Background

Mandibular sagittal split ramus osteotomy (SSRO) is a routine surgery to correct mandibular deformities, such as mandibular retrusion, protrusion, deficiency, and asymmetry. However, nonunion/malunion of the fragments and relapse caused by fixation failure after SSRO are major concerns. Rigid fixation to maintain postosteotomy segmental stabilization is critical for success. Additionally, understanding the biomechanical characteristics of different fixation methods in SSRO with large advancements is extremely important for clinical guidance. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to evaluate the biomechanical characteristics of different SSRO methods by finite element analysis.

Methods

SSRO finite element models with 5-, 10-, 15-, and 20-mm advancements were developed. Seven fixation methods, namely, two types of bicortical screws, single miniplate, dual miniplates, grid plate, dual L-shaped plates, and hybrid fixation, were positioned into the SSRO models. Molar and incisal biomechanical loads were applied to all models to simulate bite forces. We then investigated the immediate postoperative stability from four aspects, namely, the stability of the distal osteotomy segment, osteotomy regional stability, stress distribution on the mandible, and implant stress performance.

Results

The stability of the distal osteotomy segment and osteotomy region decreased when the advancement increased. All seven fixation methods displayed favorable biomechanical stability under minor advancement (5 mm). With large advancements, bicortical screws, dual miniplates, and grid plates provided better stability. The von Mises stress was concentrated around the screws close to the osteotomy region for the proximal segment for all fixation methods, and the von Mises stress on implants increased with larger advancements. With small advancements, five fixation methods endured tolerable maximum stresses of <880 MPa. A single miniplate and dual L-shaped plates generally suffered high stresses using larger advancements. The biomechanical characteristics were similar under molar and incisal loads.

Conclusions

The current study investigated the biomechanical properties of seven fixation devices after SSRO under molar and incisal loads. Generally, bicortical screws, grid plates, and dual miniplates provided better biomechanical stability using finite element analysis.

Intravenous ibuprofen versus diclofenac plus orphenadrine in orthognathic surgery: a prospective, randomized, double-blind, controlled clinical study

Objectives

The aim of this prospective, randomized, double-blind, controlled clinical study was to evaluate the analgesic effect of ibuprofen versus diclofenac plus orphenadrine on postoperative pain in orthognathic surgery.

Material and methods

Patients who underwent orthognathic surgery were randomized into two groups to receive intravenously either 600 mg of ibuprofen (I-group) or 75 mg diclofenac plus 30 mg orphenadrine (D-group), both of which were given twice daily. Additionally, both groups were given metamizole 500 mg. Rescue pain medication consisted of acetaminophen 1000 mg and piritramide 7.5 mg as needed. To assess the pain intensity, the primary end point was the numeric rating scale (NRS) recorded over the course of the hospital stay three times daily for 3 days.

Results

One hundred nine patients were enrolled (age range, 18 to 61 years) between May 2019 and November 2020. Forty-eight bilateral sagittal split osteotomies (BSSO) and 51 bimaxillary osteotomies (BIMAX) were performed. Surgical subgroup analysis found a significant higher mean NRS (2.73 vs.1.23) in the BIMAX D-group vs. I-group (p = 0.015) on the third postoperative day. Additionally, as the patient’s body mass index (BMI) increased, the mean NRS (r = 0.517, p = 0.001) also increased. No differences were found between age, gender, length of hospital stay, weight, operating times, number of patients with complete pain relief, acetaminophen or piritramide intake, and NRS values. No adverse events were observed.

Conclusion

The results of this study demonstrate that ibuprofen administration and lower BMI were associated with less pain for patients who underwent bimaxillary osteotomy on the third postoperative day. Therefore, surgeons may prefer ibuprofen for more effective pain relief after orthognathic surgery.

Clinical relevance

Ibuprofen differs from diclofenac plus orphenadrine in class and is a powerful analgetic after orthognathic surgery.

The effect of orthognathic surgery on temporomandibular disorder

This study aimed to evaluate the difference in prevalence of temporomandibular disorder (TMD) before and after orthognathic surgery (OGS), particularly in patients with mandibular asymmetry. A prospective cohort study of patients undergoing corrective orthognathic surgery was conducted. Pre-operative and post-operative (3 months, 6 months and 1 year) TMD assessment were performed according to the Diagnostic Criteria for TMD (DC/TMD) protocol. 64 patients were included in the study. Overall, there was a significant reduction of 26.5% in TMD prevalence from 60.9% pre-operatively to 34.4% 1-year post-operatively (p = 0.003). In all, 37.5% of patients had their TMD condition treated, 50% had no change in their symptoms while 12.5% experienced a worsening of their symptoms. No significant difference in terms of change in TMJ status was observed among the different ramus procedures, the type and magnitude of mandibular movement, skeletal class, and presence of mandibular asymmetry. In conclusion, it appears that corrective orthognathic surgery for dentofacial deformities might provide a secondary benefit of treating TMD. However, surgeons have to be aware that a small percentage of patients might experience a deterioration of their TMD condition, and that those who were previously asymptomatic may develop TMD symptoms after surgery.

Orthognathic Surgery of the Mandible

Orthognathic surgery performed in conjunction with orthodontic treatment is commonly performed to correct skeletal irregularities and realign the maxillomandibular relationship to improve occlusal function and facial esthetics. A thorough understanding of soft tissue esthetics, skeletal and occlusal relationships, and surgical techniques is required to obtain successful results. Surgical techniques have evolved greatly throughout history, as technological advances such as virtual surgical planning have become available and widely used to obtain predictable movements with minimized complications. The aim of this article is to review the orthognathic surgical procedures of the mandible, with particular attention to the indications, contraindications, preoperative assessment, surgical technique, and possible complications encountered.

Correction of Condylar Displacement of the Mandible Using Early Screw Removal following Patient-Customized Orthognathic Surgery

OBJECTIVE

Orthognathic surgery (OGS) is a surgical intervention that corrects dentofacial deformities through the movement of maxillary and mandibular segments to achieve adequate masticatory function, joint health, and facial harmony. However, some patients present with occlusal discrepancies, condylar sag, and/or temporomandibular disorders after OGS. Various methods have been employed to solve these problems after surgery. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of early screw removal in patients with occlusal discrepancies after OGS using three-dimensional cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT).

METHODS

In 44 patients with dentofacial deformities, patient-customized OGSs with customized plates were performed to correct facial deformities using customized guides with computer-aided surgical simulation. Of the 44 patients, eight patients complained of occlusal discrepancies and temporomandibular disorders after OGS. These eight patients underwent screw removal under local anesthesia around four weeks. The temporomandibular joint spaces at three time points (pre-surgical, post-surgical, and after screw removal) in the sagittal and coronal planes were compared using CBCT.

RESULTS

Eight patients showed an increase in joint space on CBCT images immediately after surgery (T1), but after early screw removal (T2), these spaces almost returned to their pre-surgical state, and the temporomandibular joint problem disappeared.

CONCLUSIONS

The removal of screws located in the distal segment under local anesthesia between three and four weeks post-surgically may be a treatment option for patients with post-OGS occlusal discrepancies, condylar sag, and/or temporomandibular disorder.