Literature DB >> 33927487

A Case of Extreme Skeletal Class III Malocclusion Beyond the Envelope of Discrepancy, Managed Effectively by a Modified Ortho-Surgical Protocol.

Priya Jeyaraj1, Pankaj Juneja2.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Correction of a severe anteroposterior skeletal discrepancy, as described in this case of extreme skeletal class III malocclusion, can be quite challenging and fraught with difficulties. Conventional, single-stage bi-jaw orthognathic surgery with pre-and post-surgical orthodontics is associated with drawbacks such as the risk of relapse and an unsatisfactory overall long-term outcome, with persisting occlusal discrepancies and skeletal abnormalities, especially when the magnitude of skeletal correction required is large. Excessive mandibular setback can restrict tongue space, cause narrowing of posterior airway and pharyngeal space, and be prone to relapse from the forward pterygomasseteric muscle pull, while large maxillary advancements are often accompanied by wound dehiscence and bone exposure at the site of pterygomaxillary disjunction, delayed union or malunion at the osteotomy and disjunction sites, and risk of relapse due to backward palatopharyngeal muscle pull. In addition, bi-jaw surgeries invariably involve an appreciable blood loss and a prolonged operating time with its attendant anaesthetic risks such as respiratory insufficiency. AIM AND
OBJECTIVES: To develop an orthosurgical protocol wherein excessive skeletal discrepancy can be successfully managed, achieving the desired magnitude of correction, with little or no relapse. To assess its efficacy and superiority over the hitherto-employed single-stage bi-jaw procedures in the management of severe skeletal discrepancies. MATERIALS AND
METHOD: A two-staged, shorter 'single-jaw at a time' operative procedure with an intervening period of three months between the two surgical phases was employed.
RESULTS: Drawbacks of conventional orthognathic surgery may be obviated by employing a two-staged protocol of bi-jaw surgeries allowing a minimum time period of 3 months to elapse between them. This period of time intervening between the maxillary advancement and mandibular setback allows the oral and maxillofacial musculature to adapt itself to the new jaw position following the first surgery, thus creating a better and more stable environment for the succeeding one, thereby reducing the chances of relapse thereafter, and producing more effective and stable long-term results. Moreover, the intervening time period also allows for observation of the repositioned jaw and arch relations achieved, and scrutiny for any positional changes in this post-surgical phase, which thereby allows modifications in the planned surgery of the next jaw, so as to achieve the most ideal final outcome following the second jaw surgery. A shorter operating time, reduced operator fatigue and less blood loss are other obvious advantages over the conventional bi-jaw procedures.
CONCLUSION: An effective and stable correction of the extreme class III skeletal deformity and malocclusion was achieved, with a dramatic enhancement of facial balance, symmetry and proportion in this patient, following a modified orthosurgical management protocol. The staged protocol of 'maxilla first and mandible after' orthognathic surgery with conventional pre- and post-surgical orthodontics helped in pushing the envelope of skeletal discrepancy correctable by orthognathic surgery, thereby achieving large quantum of jaw movements, with ideal and stable functional as well as aesthetic results. This is suggestive of its efficacy and superiority over the hitherto-employed single stage bi-jaw procedures in the management of severe skeletal discrepancies. © The Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons of India 2020.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Bilateral sagittal split ramus osteotomy; Functional occlusion; Le fort 1 osteotomy; Mandibular setback; Maxillary protraction/advancement; Orthognathic surgery; Skeletal Cl III malocclusion

Year:  2020        PMID: 33927487      PMCID: PMC8042093          DOI: 10.1007/s12663-020-01352-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Maxillofac Oral Surg        ISSN: 0972-8270


  25 in total

1.  Profile changes associated with different orthopedic treatment approaches in Class III malocclusions.

Authors:  Ayça Arman; T Ufuk Toygar; Eyas Abuhijleh
Journal:  Angle Orthod       Date:  2004-12       Impact factor: 2.079

Review 2.  Surgery first orthognathic approach for skeletal Class III malocclusion corrections--a literature review.

Authors:  Pornnapha Leelasinjaroen; Keith Godfrey; Montian Manosudprasit; Tasanee Wangsrimongkol; Palakorn Surakunprapha; Poonsak Pisek
Journal:  J Med Assoc Thai       Date:  2012-11

3.  Different skeletal types underlying Class III malocclusion in a random population.

Authors:  Christine Bettina Staudt; Stavros Kiliaridis
Journal:  Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop       Date:  2009-11       Impact factor: 2.650

4.  Effects of maxillary protraction for early correction of class III malocclusion.

Authors:  Mevlut Celikoglu; Hüsamettin Oktay
Journal:  Eur J Orthod       Date:  2013-03-04       Impact factor: 3.075

5.  Mandibular setback for surgical correction of mandibular hyperplasia--does it provoke sleep-related breathing disorders?

Authors:  W Hochban; R Schürmann; U Brandenburg; R Conradt
Journal:  Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg       Date:  1996-10       Impact factor: 2.789

6.  Postoperative nausea and vomiting following orthognathic surgery.

Authors:  C Phillips; C D Brookes; J Rich; J Arbon; T A Turvey
Journal:  Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg       Date:  2015-02-02       Impact factor: 2.789

7.  Assessment of the pharyngeal airway space after mandibular setback surgery.

Authors:  M Tselnik; M A Pogrel
Journal:  J Oral Maxillofac Surg       Date:  2000-03       Impact factor: 1.895

8.  Stability of mandibular setback surgery with and without presurgical orthodontics.

Authors:  Chin-Soo Kim; Sang-Chang Lee; Hee-Moon Kyung; Hyo-Sang Park; Tae-Geon Kwon
Journal:  J Oral Maxillofac Surg       Date:  2013-10-02       Impact factor: 1.895

9.  Comparison of double-plate appliance/facemask combination and facemask therapy in treating class III malocclusions.

Authors:  Deniz Gencer; Emine Kaygisiz; Sema Yüksel; Tuba Tortop
Journal:  Angle Orthod       Date:  2014-06-10       Impact factor: 2.079

10.  Surgery first in orthognathic surgery: what have we learned? A comprehensive workflow based on 45 consecutive cases.

Authors:  Federico Hernández-Alfaro; Raquel Guijarro-Martínez; María A Peiró-Guijarro
Journal:  J Oral Maxillofac Surg       Date:  2013-10-16       Impact factor: 1.895

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.