Aesthetic plastic surgery · 2018
Strategies of Mandibular Revision: A Retrospective Study of Revisional Mandibular Surgery for Unaesthetic Results of Previous Mandibular Reduction.
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.
Yu Panxi, Song Guodong, Zong Xianlei, Yang Xiaonan, Zhao Jingyi, Guo Xiaoshuang, Lai Chenzhi, Qi Zuoliang, Jin Xiaolei
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Mandibular reduction has been developed and popularized in Asia for decades. Despite the technical advancement and experience accumulation, complications and unaesthetic results still occur, and some need a revision surgery. This study aims to introduce the experience of revision surgery to reshape the unaesthetic mandibular contour after previous mandibular reduction.
METHODS: From May 2011 to September 2017, patients dissatisfied with the result of previous mandibular reduction and who received a secondary mandibular revision were retrospectively reviewed and analyzed.
RESULTS: Twenty-five patients were included in this study. Under-correction (88%, 22/25) was the most common aesthetic problem requiring revision, followed by asymmetry (56%, 14/25), broad chin (40%, 10/25), second mandibular angle (32%, 8/25), and over-correction (8%, 2/25). As revision techniques, long-curve mandibular reduction, simple mandibular reduction, and mandibular grinding were performed on 60% (15/25), 36% (9/25), and 4% (1/25) of the patients, respectively. All the patients were satisfied with the results. Cephalometric measurements indicated a significant bone removal after revision.
CONCLUSIONS: When performing a revision surgery to reshape the mandibular contour, the surgeon should have a clear surgical plan based on comprehensive evaluation, focus on the balanced harmony of the entire face, use proper technique and instruments, and avoid concomitant injury and complications. The one-staged technique that treats the whole mandible as an entirety is superior than multistaged techniques to improve the aesthetic outcomes to the largest extent.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these evidence-based medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .
METHODS: From May 2011 to September 2017, patients dissatisfied with the result of previous mandibular reduction and who received a secondary mandibular revision were retrospectively reviewed and analyzed.
RESULTS: Twenty-five patients were included in this study. Under-correction (88%, 22/25) was the most common aesthetic problem requiring revision, followed by asymmetry (56%, 14/25), broad chin (40%, 10/25), second mandibular angle (32%, 8/25), and over-correction (8%, 2/25). As revision techniques, long-curve mandibular reduction, simple mandibular reduction, and mandibular grinding were performed on 60% (15/25), 36% (9/25), and 4% (1/25) of the patients, respectively. All the patients were satisfied with the results. Cephalometric measurements indicated a significant bone removal after revision.
CONCLUSIONS: When performing a revision surgery to reshape the mandibular contour, the surgeon should have a clear surgical plan based on comprehensive evaluation, focus on the balanced harmony of the entire face, use proper technique and instruments, and avoid concomitant injury and complications. The one-staged technique that treats the whole mandible as an entirety is superior than multistaged techniques to improve the aesthetic outcomes to the largest extent.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these evidence-based medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .