Literature DB >> 25871900

Is There a Difference in Stability or Neurosensory Function Between Bilateral Sagittal Split Ramus Osteotomy and Intraoral Vertical Ramus Osteotomy for Mandibular Setback?

Essam Ahmed Al-Moraissi1, Edward Ellis2.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Bilateral sagittal split ramus osteotomy (BSSO) and intraoral vertical ramus osteotomy (IVRO) are used for mandibular setbacks. The purpose of this study was to determine differences in skeletal stability and neurosensory disturbance (NSD) of the mental nerve after mandibular setback using these operations.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis on these topics was performed. An electronic search of several databases with specific keywords, a reference search, and a manual search from database inception to December 2014 was performed with inclusion criteria of clinical human studies, randomized controlled trials (RCTs), controlled clinical trials (CCTs), and retrospective studies, with the predictor variable being BSSO or IVRO after mandibular setback surgery. The outcome variables of horizontal and vertical relapse using cephalometrics and NSD using trigeminal somatosensory-evoked potential and subjective tests were statistically analyzed.
RESULTS: The initial PubMed search identified 716 studies of which 13 met the inclusion criteria—4 RCTs, 3 CCTs, and 6 retrospective studies. No statistically significant difference was found between the 2 groups regarding horizontal skeletal stability, but the BSSO group had more stability in the vertical dimension (P = .02). There was a statistically significant difference between BSSO and IVRO with regard to NSD of the inferior alveolar nerve (IAN; P = .001).
CONCLUSION: The results of this meta-analysis suggest that BSSO and IVRO have good stability when used to set back the mandible. Furthermore, the results showed that IVRO statistically decreased the incidence of NSD of the IAN after mandibular setback surgery compared with BSSO.
Copyright © 2015 American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25871900     DOI: 10.1016/j.joms.2015.01.010

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


  5 in total

1.  CAD/CAM Engineered Patient-Specific Impants as a Reposition Device in Le Fort I and Modified Subcondylar Osteotomies: Case Report of Facial Deformity Correction in Acromegaly.

Authors:  Juho Suojanen; Zlatan Hodzic; Tuula Palotie; Patricia Stoor
Journal:  Craniomaxillofac Trauma Reconstr       Date:  2020-07-06

2.  Professional oral health care reduces the duration of hospital stay in patients undergoing orthognathic surgery.

Authors:  Hideo Shigeishi; Mohammad Zeshaan Rahman; Kouji Ohta; Shigehiro Ono; Masaru Sugiyama; Masaaki Takechi
Journal:  Biomed Rep       Date:  2015-11-10

3.  The neurosensory deficit of inferior alveolar nerve following bilateral sagittal split osteotomy: a prospective study.

Authors:  Abdullah Hanfesh; Ra'ed Ghaleb Salma; Khaild Al Mutairi; Sadeen K AlShiha; Sami Al Otaibi
Journal:  Oral Maxillofac Surg       Date:  2021-09-12

4.  The Predictability of the Surgical Outcomes of Class III Patients in the Transverse Dimension-A Study of Three-Dimensional Assessment.

Authors:  U-Kei Lai; Cheng-Chun Wu; Yu-Jen Chang; Shiu-Shiung Lin; Jui-Pin Lai; Te-Ju Wu
Journal:  J Pers Med       Date:  2022-07-15

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

Authors:  Oren Peleg; Reema Mahmoud; Amir Shuster; Shimrit Arbel; Shlomi Kleinman; Eitan Mijiritsky; Clariel Ianculovici
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2022-08-17       Impact factor: 4.614

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.