Literature DB >> 29606563

Does two-dimensional vs. three-dimensional surgical simulation produce better surgical outcomes among patients with class III facial asymmetry?

N Udomlarptham1, C-H Lin2, Y-C Wang3, E W-C Ko4.   

Abstract

The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of traditional two-dimensional planning (2DP) and three-dimensional surgical simulation (3DS) in the surgical correction of skeletal class III with facial asymmetry. This retrospective cohort study included 37 consecutive adult Taiwanese patients. Preoperative and postoperative three-dimensional cephalometric measurements were obtained from cone beam computed tomography scans. The outcome variables were the differences in preoperative and postoperative linear and angular measurements and the differences between the two groups after surgery. When the surgical result was compared between the 2DP and 3DS groups, significant differences were found for four cephalometric variables: the distance from gonion on the non-deviated side to the midsagittal plane (MSP), mid-gonion to the MSP, upper first molar on the non-deviated side to the Frankfort horizontal plane, and the yaw angle. In the 3DS group, mandibular symmetry was achieved because the centre between the bilateral gonions was improved, and because there was no significant difference in the horizontal gonion (Go to the MSP) between the deviated and non-deviated sides after surgery. 3DS provides all the necessary information for planned surgical movements for the correction of facial asymmetry; it should be considered during surgical planning to improve surgical outcomes, particularly the achievement of bilateral mandibular contour symmetry.
Copyright © 2018 International Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  facial asymmetry; orthognathic surgery; skeletal class III malocclusion; three-dimensional surgical simulation

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29606563     DOI: 10.1016/j.ijom.2018.02.014

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg        ISSN: 0901-5027            Impact factor:   2.789


  6 in total

1.  Outcomes of conventional versus virtual surgical planning of orthognathic surgery using surgery-first approach for class III asymmetry.

Authors:  Yu-Fang Liao; Ying-An Chen; Yi-Chieh Chen; Yu-Ray Chen
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2020-02-25       Impact factor: 3.573

2.  Similarity index for intuitive assessment of three-dimensional facial asymmetry.

Authors:  Sun Mi Kwon; Jae Joon Hwang; Yun-Hoa Jung; Bong-Hae Cho; Kee-Joon Lee; Chung-Ju Hwang; Sung-Hwan Choi
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2019-07-29       Impact factor: 4.379

3.  Computer-Aided Planning in Orthognathic Surgery: A Comparative Study with the Establishment of Burstone Analysis-Derived 3D Norms.

Authors:  Cheng-Ting Ho; Rafael Denadai; Hsin-Chih Lai; Lun-Jou Lo; Hsiu-Hsia Lin
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2019-12-02       Impact factor: 4.241

4.  The outcome of skeletofacial reconstruction with mandibular rotation for management of asymmetric skeletal class III deformity: A three-dimensional computer-assisted investigation.

Authors:  Ting-Yu Wu; Rafael Denadai; Hsiu-Hsia Lin; Cheng-Ting Ho; Lun-Jou Lo
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2019-09-16       Impact factor: 4.379

5.  Outcome of facial contour asymmetry after conventional two-dimensional versus computer-assisted three-dimensional planning in cleft orthognathic surgery.

Authors:  Po-Jung Hsu; Rafael Denadai; Betty C J Pai; Hsiu-Hsia Lin; Lun-Jou Lo
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2020-02-11       Impact factor: 4.379

6.  One-splint versus two-splint technique in orthognathic surgery for class III asymmetry: comparison of patient-centred outcomes.

Authors:  Jing Hao Ng; Ying-An Chen; Yuh-Jia Hsieh; Chuan-Fong Yao; Yu-Fang Liao; Yu-Ray Chen
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2021-05-05       Impact factor: 3.573

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.