Oral and maxillofacial surgery · 2024
Investigation of orthognathic surgery indicators-combination with index of orthognathic functional treatment needs (IOFTN) and maxillofacial morphometric analysis.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Zheng Zhuoyang, Hasebe Daichi, Suda Daisuke, Saito Naoaki, Saito Daisuke, Nihara Jun, Nohno Kaname, Saito Isao, Kobayashi Tadaharu
Аннотация
PURPOSE: The aim of this retrospective study was to determine orthognathic surgery indicators for Japanese patients with jaw deformities using both Index of Orthognathic Functional Treatment Needs (IOFTN) and maxillofacial morphometric analysis.
SUBJECTS AND METHODS: The subjects were 89 patients treated with orthognathic surgery and 92 patients treated with orthodontic treatment alone, and were classified as class I, II, or III according to the ANB angle. Based on the results for IOFTN and the results of cephalometric analysis, the indication criteria for orthognathic surgery were examined.
RESULTS: In IOFTN analysis, none of patients in the orthognathic surgery group were classified as category 1 or 2, while 48% of the patients in the orthodontic treatment group were classified as category 4 or 5. The results of the cephalometric analysis of patients in classified categories 4 and 5 showed that the orthognathic surgery group had significantly greater lateral mandibular deviation in Class I cases, significantly more severe degree of mandibular retrusion in Class II cases, and significantly more severe degree of mandibular prognathism in Class III cases. The results of the logistic regression analysis showed that IOFTN was a common variable as an indication criterion for orthognathic surgery, and several different variables were also selected from the cephalometric measurements in each group.
CONCLUSION: IOFTN is a highly sensitive and useful indicator as a criterion for orthognathic surgery. However, in the choice of treatment strategy, maxillofacial morphometric analyses and the patient's desired goal are important.
SUBJECTS AND METHODS: The subjects were 89 patients treated with orthognathic surgery and 92 patients treated with orthodontic treatment alone, and were classified as class I, II, or III according to the ANB angle. Based on the results for IOFTN and the results of cephalometric analysis, the indication criteria for orthognathic surgery were examined.
RESULTS: In IOFTN analysis, none of patients in the orthognathic surgery group were classified as category 1 or 2, while 48% of the patients in the orthodontic treatment group were classified as category 4 or 5. The results of the cephalometric analysis of patients in classified categories 4 and 5 showed that the orthognathic surgery group had significantly greater lateral mandibular deviation in Class I cases, significantly more severe degree of mandibular retrusion in Class II cases, and significantly more severe degree of mandibular prognathism in Class III cases. The results of the logistic regression analysis showed that IOFTN was a common variable as an indication criterion for orthognathic surgery, and several different variables were also selected from the cephalometric measurements in each group.
CONCLUSION: IOFTN is a highly sensitive and useful indicator as a criterion for orthognathic surgery. However, in the choice of treatment strategy, maxillofacial morphometric analyses and the patient's desired goal are important.