The Journal of craniofacial surgery · 2023
LeFort III Versus Monobloc Frontofacial Advancement: A Comparative Analysis of Soft Tissue Changes.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Wagner Connor S, Cho Daniel Y, Villavisanis Dillan F, Kumar Satvika, Salinero Lauren K, Barrero Carlos E, Swanson Jordan W, Bartlett Scott P, Taylor Jesse A
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: The LeFort III and monobloc are commonly used midface advancement procedures for patients with syndromic craniosynostosis with well characterized postoperative skeletal changes. However, the differential effects of these procedures on facial soft tissues are less understood. The purpose of this study was to critically analyze and compare the effects of these 2 procedures on the overlying soft tissues of the face.
METHODS: Frontal and lateral preoperative and postoperative photographs of patients undergoing monobloc or LeFort III were retrospectively analyzed using ImageJ to measure soft tissue landmarks. Measurements included height of facial thirds, nasal length and width, intercanthal distance, and palpebral fissure height and width. Facial convexity was quantified by calculating the angle between sellion (radix), subnasale, and pogonion on lateral photographs.
RESULTS: Twenty-five patients with an average age of 6.7 years (range 4.8-14.5) undergoing monobloc (n=12) and LeFort III (n=13) were identified retrospectively and analyzed preoperatively and 6.4±3.6 months postoperatively. Patients undergoing LeFort III had a greater average postoperative increase in facial convexity angle acuity (28.2°) than patients undergoing monobloc (17.8°, P =0.021). Patients in both groups experience postoperative increases in nasal width ( P <0.001) and decreases in palpebral fissure height ( P <0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: Both subcranial LeFort III advancements and monobloc frontofacial advancements resulted in significant changes in the soft tissues. Patients undergoing LeFort III procedures achieved greater acuity of the facial convexity angle, likely because the nasion is not advanced with the LeFort III segment.
METHODS: Frontal and lateral preoperative and postoperative photographs of patients undergoing monobloc or LeFort III were retrospectively analyzed using ImageJ to measure soft tissue landmarks. Measurements included height of facial thirds, nasal length and width, intercanthal distance, and palpebral fissure height and width. Facial convexity was quantified by calculating the angle between sellion (radix), subnasale, and pogonion on lateral photographs.
RESULTS: Twenty-five patients with an average age of 6.7 years (range 4.8-14.5) undergoing monobloc (n=12) and LeFort III (n=13) were identified retrospectively and analyzed preoperatively and 6.4±3.6 months postoperatively. Patients undergoing LeFort III had a greater average postoperative increase in facial convexity angle acuity (28.2°) than patients undergoing monobloc (17.8°, P =0.021). Patients in both groups experience postoperative increases in nasal width ( P <0.001) and decreases in palpebral fissure height ( P <0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: Both subcranial LeFort III advancements and monobloc frontofacial advancements resulted in significant changes in the soft tissues. Patients undergoing LeFort III procedures achieved greater acuity of the facial convexity angle, likely because the nasion is not advanced with the LeFort III segment.