Oral surgery, oral medicine, oral pathology, oral radiology, and endodontics · 2007
Comparison of maxillary stability after Le Fort I osteotomy for occlusal cant correction surgery and maxillary advanced surgery.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание 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.
Ueki Koichiro, Hashiba Yukari, Marukawa Kohei, Yoshida Kan, Shimizu Chika, Nakagawa Kiyomasa, Yamamoto Etsuhide
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To compare postoperative maxillary stability following Le Fort I osteotomy for the correction of occlusal cant as compared with conventional Le Fort I osteotomy for maxillary advancement.
STUDY DESIGN: The subjects were 40 Japanese adults with jaw deformities. Of these, 20 underwent a Le Fort I osteotomy and intraoral vertical ramus osteotomy (IVRO) to correct asymmetric skeletal morphology and inclined occlusal cant. The other 20 patients underwent a Le Fort I osteotomy and sagittal split ramus osteotomy (SSRO) to advance the maxilla. Lateral and posteroanterior cephalograms were taken postoperatively and assessed statistically. Thereafter, the 2 groups were followed for time-course changes.
RESULTS: There was no significant difference between the 2 groups with regard to time-course changes during the immediate postoperative period.
CONCLUSION: This suggests that maxillary stability after Le Fort I osteotomy for cant correction does not differ from that after Le Fort I osteotomy for maxillary advancement.
STUDY DESIGN: The subjects were 40 Japanese adults with jaw deformities. Of these, 20 underwent a Le Fort I osteotomy and intraoral vertical ramus osteotomy (IVRO) to correct asymmetric skeletal morphology and inclined occlusal cant. The other 20 patients underwent a Le Fort I osteotomy and sagittal split ramus osteotomy (SSRO) to advance the maxilla. Lateral and posteroanterior cephalograms were taken postoperatively and assessed statistically. Thereafter, the 2 groups were followed for time-course changes.
RESULTS: There was no significant difference between the 2 groups with regard to time-course changes during the immediate postoperative period.
CONCLUSION: This suggests that maxillary stability after Le Fort I osteotomy for cant correction does not differ from that after Le Fort I osteotomy for maxillary advancement.