Literature DB >> 20006171

Comparative biomechanical and photoelastic evaluation of different fixation techniques of sagittal split ramus osteotomy in mandibular advancement.

Fábio Ricardo Loureiro Sato1, Luciana Asprino, Simonides Consani, Márcio de Moraes.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The aim of the present study was to comparatively evaluate the resistance and tension areas created after load incidence in different varieties of sagittal split ramus osteotomy fixation techniques.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty synthetic polyurethane hemimandible replicas were subjected to linear loading tests to evaluate 4 fixation techniques of the sagittal split ramus osteotomy using 2-mm system plates and screws. The hemimandibles were fixed with three 90 degrees linear screws, three 60 degrees linear screws, 3 screws in a reversed L arrangement, and one titanium miniplate. Each group was subjected to linear loading using an Instron 4411 servohydraulic mechanical testing unit. The load peak value and peak displacement were measured. Another 4 hemimandible replicas were made of photoelastic resin and subjected to photoelastic analysis after linear loading with a 3-mm displacement.
RESULTS: The results of the mechanical tests showed statistically significant differences between the fixation groups. The linear 90 degrees fixation and the reversed L arrangement presented with greater loading resistance, followed by the linear 60 degrees fixation and miniplates. In relation to the stress distribution in the photoelastic analysis, the fringes were concentrated near the osteotomy and to the lower part of the mandible in the linear 90 degrees -screw system and reversed L arrangement. In the case of the linear 60 degrees screws, most fringes were located around and between the screws. In the case of the miniplates, the fringes were concentrated around the screws near the osteotomy and more distally.
CONCLUSION: Under the conditions tested, the linear 90 degrees and reversed L arrangements provided the most favorable behavior.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20006171     DOI: 10.1016/j.joms.2009.09.004

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Oral Maxillofac Surg        ISSN: 0278-2391            Impact factor:   1.895


  6 in total

1.  Analysis of Mandibular Test Specimens Used to Assess a Bone Fixation System.

Authors:  Leandro Stocco Baccarin; Renato Correa Viana Casarin; Jorge Vicente Lopes-da-Silva; Luis Augusto Passeri
Journal:  Craniomaxillofac Trauma Reconstr       Date:  2014-11-20

2.  Photoelastic evaluation of two different sagittal split ramus osteotomies in advancement surgery.

Authors:  Valdir Cabral Andrade; Sergio Olate; Leandro Pozzer; Lucas Cavalieri-Pereira; Márcio de Moraes; Jose Ricardo de Albergaria-Barbosa
Journal:  Int J Clin Exp Med       Date:  2014-08-15

3.  Influence of the design in sagittal split ramus osteotomy on the mechanical behavior.

Authors:  Leandro Pozzer; Sergio Olate; Lucas Cavalieri-Pereira; Márcio de Moraes; José Ricardo Albergaría-Barbosa
Journal:  Int J Clin Exp Med       Date:  2014-05-15

4.  Comparison of strengths of five internal fixation methods used after bilateral sagittal split ramus osteotomy: An in vitro study.

Authors:  Farzin Sarkarat; Atiye Ahmady; Farzam Farahmand; Ali Fateh; Roozbeh Kahali; Amir Nourani; Vahid Rakhshan
Journal:  Dent Res J (Isfahan)       Date:  2020-08-14

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

Authors:  Yu He; Henglei Zhang; Jia Qiao; Xi Fu; Shixing Xu; Qi Jin; Jianfeng Liu; Ying Chen; Bing Yu; Feng Niu
Journal:  Front Surg       Date:  2022-05-04

Review 6.  TMJ response to mandibular advancement surgery: an overview of risk factors.

Authors:  José Valladares-Neto; Lucia Helena Cevidanes; Wesley Cabral Rocha; Guilherme de Araújo Almeida; João Batista de Paiva; José Rino-Neto
Journal:  J Appl Oral Sci       Date:  2014 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 2.698

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.