Comparative Study of Skeletal Stability between Postoperative Skeletal Intermaxillary Fixation and No Skeletal Fixation after Bilateral Sagittal Split Ramus Osteotomy: an 18 Months Retrospective Study

Objectives: The purpose of the present study was to evaluate skeletal stability after mandibular advancement with bilateral sagittal split osteotomy. Material and Methods: Twenty-six patients underwent single-jaw bilateral sagittal split osteotomy (BSSO) to correct skeletal Class II malocclusion....

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Jens Hartlev, Erik Godtfredsen, Niels Trolle Andersen, Thomas Jensen
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Lithuanian University of Health Sciences, Faculty of Odontology 2014-04-01
Series:eJournal of Oral Maxillofacial Research
Subjects:
Online Access:http://www.ejomr.org/JOMR/archives/2014/1/e2/v5n1e2ht.htm
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1849397839559393280
author Jens Hartlev
Erik Godtfredsen
Niels Trolle Andersen
Thomas Jensen
author_facet Jens Hartlev
Erik Godtfredsen
Niels Trolle Andersen
Thomas Jensen
author_sort Jens Hartlev
collection DOAJ
description Objectives: The purpose of the present study was to evaluate skeletal stability after mandibular advancement with bilateral sagittal split osteotomy. Material and Methods: Twenty-six patients underwent single-jaw bilateral sagittal split osteotomy (BSSO) to correct skeletal Class II malocclusion. One group (n = 13) were treated postoperatively with skeletal elastic intermaxillary fixation (IMF) while the other group (n = 13) where threated without skeletal elastic IMF. Results: The mean advancement at B-point and Pog in the skeletal elastic IMF group was 6.44 mm and 7.22 mm, respectively. Relapse at follow-up at B-point was -0.74 mm and -0.29 mm at Pog. The mean advancement at B-point and Pog in the no skeletal elastic IMF group was 6.30 mm and 6.45 mm, respectively. Relapse at follow-up at B-point was -0.97 mm and -0.86 mm at Pog. There was no statistical significant (P > 0.05) difference between the skeletal IMF group and the no skeletal group regarding advancement nor relapse at B-point or Pog. Conclusions: Bilateral sagittal split osteotomy is characterized as a stable treatment to correct Class II malocclusion. This study demonstrated no difference of relapse between the skeletal intermaxillary fixation group and the no skeletal intermaxillary fixation group. Because of selection-bias and the reduced number of patients it still remains inconclusive whether to recommend skeletal intermaxillary fixation or not in the prevention of relapse after mandibular advancement.
format Article
id doaj-art-c9ce3d511e7c407f80f5331a5bb8221c
institution Kabale University
issn 2029-283X
language English
publishDate 2014-04-01
publisher Lithuanian University of Health Sciences, Faculty of Odontology
record_format Article
series eJournal of Oral Maxillofacial Research
spelling doaj-art-c9ce3d511e7c407f80f5331a5bb8221c2025-08-20T03:38:49ZengLithuanian University of Health Sciences, Faculty of OdontologyeJournal of Oral Maxillofacial Research2029-283X2014-04-0151e210.5037/jomr.2014.5102Comparative Study of Skeletal Stability between Postoperative Skeletal Intermaxillary Fixation and No Skeletal Fixation after Bilateral Sagittal Split Ramus Osteotomy: an 18 Months Retrospective StudyJens HartlevErik GodtfredsenNiels Trolle AndersenThomas JensenObjectives: The purpose of the present study was to evaluate skeletal stability after mandibular advancement with bilateral sagittal split osteotomy. Material and Methods: Twenty-six patients underwent single-jaw bilateral sagittal split osteotomy (BSSO) to correct skeletal Class II malocclusion. One group (n = 13) were treated postoperatively with skeletal elastic intermaxillary fixation (IMF) while the other group (n = 13) where threated without skeletal elastic IMF. Results: The mean advancement at B-point and Pog in the skeletal elastic IMF group was 6.44 mm and 7.22 mm, respectively. Relapse at follow-up at B-point was -0.74 mm and -0.29 mm at Pog. The mean advancement at B-point and Pog in the no skeletal elastic IMF group was 6.30 mm and 6.45 mm, respectively. Relapse at follow-up at B-point was -0.97 mm and -0.86 mm at Pog. There was no statistical significant (P > 0.05) difference between the skeletal IMF group and the no skeletal group regarding advancement nor relapse at B-point or Pog. Conclusions: Bilateral sagittal split osteotomy is characterized as a stable treatment to correct Class II malocclusion. This study demonstrated no difference of relapse between the skeletal intermaxillary fixation group and the no skeletal intermaxillary fixation group. Because of selection-bias and the reduced number of patients it still remains inconclusive whether to recommend skeletal intermaxillary fixation or not in the prevention of relapse after mandibular advancement.http://www.ejomr.org/JOMR/archives/2014/1/e2/v5n1e2ht.htmmandibular advancementmaxillomandibular fixationorthognatic surgeryrelapsesagittal split ramus osteotomyskeletal fixation
spellingShingle Jens Hartlev
Erik Godtfredsen
Niels Trolle Andersen
Thomas Jensen
Comparative Study of Skeletal Stability between Postoperative Skeletal Intermaxillary Fixation and No Skeletal Fixation after Bilateral Sagittal Split Ramus Osteotomy: an 18 Months Retrospective Study
eJournal of Oral Maxillofacial Research
mandibular advancement
maxillomandibular fixation
orthognatic surgery
relapse
sagittal split ramus osteotomy
skeletal fixation
title Comparative Study of Skeletal Stability between Postoperative Skeletal Intermaxillary Fixation and No Skeletal Fixation after Bilateral Sagittal Split Ramus Osteotomy: an 18 Months Retrospective Study
title_full Comparative Study of Skeletal Stability between Postoperative Skeletal Intermaxillary Fixation and No Skeletal Fixation after Bilateral Sagittal Split Ramus Osteotomy: an 18 Months Retrospective Study
title_fullStr Comparative Study of Skeletal Stability between Postoperative Skeletal Intermaxillary Fixation and No Skeletal Fixation after Bilateral Sagittal Split Ramus Osteotomy: an 18 Months Retrospective Study
title_full_unstemmed Comparative Study of Skeletal Stability between Postoperative Skeletal Intermaxillary Fixation and No Skeletal Fixation after Bilateral Sagittal Split Ramus Osteotomy: an 18 Months Retrospective Study
title_short Comparative Study of Skeletal Stability between Postoperative Skeletal Intermaxillary Fixation and No Skeletal Fixation after Bilateral Sagittal Split Ramus Osteotomy: an 18 Months Retrospective Study
title_sort comparative study of skeletal stability between postoperative skeletal intermaxillary fixation and no skeletal fixation after bilateral sagittal split ramus osteotomy an 18 months retrospective study
topic mandibular advancement
maxillomandibular fixation
orthognatic surgery
relapse
sagittal split ramus osteotomy
skeletal fixation
url http://www.ejomr.org/JOMR/archives/2014/1/e2/v5n1e2ht.htm
work_keys_str_mv AT jenshartlev comparativestudyofskeletalstabilitybetweenpostoperativeskeletalintermaxillaryfixationandnoskeletalfixationafterbilateralsagittalsplitramusosteotomyan18monthsretrospectivestudy
AT erikgodtfredsen comparativestudyofskeletalstabilitybetweenpostoperativeskeletalintermaxillaryfixationandnoskeletalfixationafterbilateralsagittalsplitramusosteotomyan18monthsretrospectivestudy
AT nielstrolleandersen comparativestudyofskeletalstabilitybetweenpostoperativeskeletalintermaxillaryfixationandnoskeletalfixationafterbilateralsagittalsplitramusosteotomyan18monthsretrospectivestudy
AT thomasjensen comparativestudyofskeletalstabilitybetweenpostoperativeskeletalintermaxillaryfixationandnoskeletalfixationafterbilateralsagittalsplitramusosteotomyan18monthsretrospectivestudy