Chun-Ming Chen1, Michael Yuan-Chien Chen2, Jung-Hsuan Cheng3, Kwei-Jing Chen4, Yu-Chuan Tseng5. 1. Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Kaohsiung Medical University Hospital, Kaohsiung, Taiwan; School of Dentistry, College of Dental Medicine, Kaohsiung Medical University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan. 2. Department of Dentistry, China Medical University Hospital, China Medical University, Taichung, Taiwan; School of Dentistry, College of Medicine, China Medical University, Taichung, Taiwan. 3. School of Dentistry, College of Dental Medicine, Kaohsiung Medical University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan; Department of Orthodontics, Kaohsiung Medical University Hospital, Kaohsiung, Taiwan. 4. Department of Dentistry, China Medical University Hospital, China Medical University, Taichung, Taiwan. 5. School of Dentistry, College of Dental Medicine, Kaohsiung Medical University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan; Department of Orthodontics, Kaohsiung Medical University Hospital, Kaohsiung, Taiwan. Electronic address: yct79d@seed.net.tw.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/ PURPOSE: Patients are always concerned about their postoperative appearance before surgery for facial deformity correction. The present study investigated the facial profile and frontal changes following two-jaw surgery. METHODS: Forty patients who underwent two-jaw surgery were divided by the amount of mandibular setback (group I: ≤8 mm and group II: >8 mm). Cephalometric radiograms (lateral and frontal) were collected and analyzed at three intervals: preoperatively (T1), immediately postoperatively (T2), and final follow-up (T3). The following points were identified: cheek points (C1-C5), pronasale (Prn, tip of the nose), anterior nasal spine (ANS), subnasal (Sn), point A, labrale superius (Ls), incision superius (Is), labrale inferius (Li), incision inferius (Ii), point B, labiomental sulcus (Si), pogonion (Pog), soft tissue pogonion (PogS), ramus point (RP), and gonion (Go). The immediate postoperative changes (T21), final postoperative changes (T32), and final stability (T31) were calculated and analyzed. RESULTS: In T31, the cheek line showed significant advancements of 2.3 mm (group I) and 1.6 mm (group II). The soft:hard tissue ratios were significantly correlated: Prn:ANS (0.37:1), Prn:A (0.39:1), Sn:A (0.85:1), C3:A (0.82:1), Ls:Is (0.92:1), Li:Ii (0.91:1), Si:B (0.88:1), and PogS:Pog (group I, 0.78:1 and group II, 0.93:1). The intercondylion and intergonial widths of group II (T31) significantly increased 1.8 and 4 mm, respectively. Regarding the postoperative skeletal stability (T32), group I showed significant correlations between amounts of mandibular setback, but group II did not. CONCLUSION: In the facial profile, the cheek line showed significant advancement postoperatively. The frontal mandibular transverse dimensions were significantly increased.
BACKGROUND/ PURPOSE:Patients are always concerned about their postoperative appearance before surgery for facial deformity correction. The present study investigated the facial profile and frontal changes following two-jaw surgery. METHODS: Forty patients who underwent two-jaw surgery were divided by the amount of mandibular setback (group I: ≤8 mm and group II: >8 mm). Cephalometric radiograms (lateral and frontal) were collected and analyzed at three intervals: preoperatively (T1), immediately postoperatively (T2), and final follow-up (T3). The following points were identified: cheek points (C1-C5), pronasale (Prn, tip of the nose), anterior nasal spine (ANS), subnasal (Sn), point A, labrale superius (Ls), incision superius (Is), labrale inferius (Li), incision inferius (Ii), point B, labiomental sulcus (Si), pogonion (Pog), soft tissue pogonion (PogS), ramus point (RP), and gonion (Go). The immediate postoperative changes (T21), final postoperative changes (T32), and final stability (T31) were calculated and analyzed. RESULTS: In T31, the cheek line showed significant advancements of 2.3 mm (group I) and 1.6 mm (group II). The soft:hard tissue ratios were significantly correlated: Prn:ANS (0.37:1), Prn:A (0.39:1), Sn:A (0.85:1), C3:A (0.82:1), Ls:Is (0.92:1), Li:Ii (0.91:1), Si:B (0.88:1), and PogS:Pog (group I, 0.78:1 and group II, 0.93:1). The intercondylion and intergonial widths of group II (T31) significantly increased 1.8 and 4 mm, respectively. Regarding the postoperative skeletal stability (T32), group I showed significant correlations between amounts of mandibular setback, but group II did not. CONCLUSION: In the facial profile, the cheek line showed significant advancement postoperatively. The frontal mandibular transverse dimensions were significantly increased.