Journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery : official journal of the American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons · 2011
Midfacial soft-tissue changes after advancement of maxilla with Le Fort I osteotomy and mandibular setback surgery: comparison of conventional and high Le Fort I osteotomies by superimposition of cone-beam computed tomography volumes.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание 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.
Kim Yong-Il, Park Soo-Byung, Son Woo-Sung, Hwang Dae-Seok
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To compare the soft-tissue changes in the midfacial areas of patients who underwent conventional and high Le Fort I osteotomies with maxillary advancement, using voxel-by-voxel registration at the cranial bases, and to evaluate the influence of the level of the osteotomy cut on those soft-tissue changes.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The subjects included 42 patients (28 in group 1 and 14 in group 2) who had undergone conventional or high Le Fort I osteotomy with maxillary advancement and mandibular setback sagittal split ramus osteotomy. Using the method involving superimposition of 3-dimensional cone-beam computed tomography volumes, we evaluated the soft-tissue changes preoperatively and postoperatively. The midfacial area was measured with a 10 × 27 grid at 4.5-mm (vertical) and 5-mm (horizontal) intervals.
RESULTS: The maxillary advancement in group 1 averaged 3.35 ± 1.06 mm at the A-point and 3.23 ± 0.98 mm at the same location in group 2. Both of the Le Fort I osteotomies induced an overall hard-to-soft tissue response in the midfacial area (P < .05).
CONCLUSIONS: In group 1, the distinctly changed soft tissue was marked near the osteotomy line and upper lip. The distribution of the changed points was within a roughly triangular area between the 2 nasolabial folds and the upper lip. In group 2, the soft-tissue changes were concentrated just below the infraorbital foramen. The distribution of the affected soft tissue after the high Le Fort I osteotomy was within the rectangular malar region between the 2 infraorbital foramens and the upper lip.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The subjects included 42 patients (28 in group 1 and 14 in group 2) who had undergone conventional or high Le Fort I osteotomy with maxillary advancement and mandibular setback sagittal split ramus osteotomy. Using the method involving superimposition of 3-dimensional cone-beam computed tomography volumes, we evaluated the soft-tissue changes preoperatively and postoperatively. The midfacial area was measured with a 10 × 27 grid at 4.5-mm (vertical) and 5-mm (horizontal) intervals.
RESULTS: The maxillary advancement in group 1 averaged 3.35 ± 1.06 mm at the A-point and 3.23 ± 0.98 mm at the same location in group 2. Both of the Le Fort I osteotomies induced an overall hard-to-soft tissue response in the midfacial area (P < .05).
CONCLUSIONS: In group 1, the distinctly changed soft tissue was marked near the osteotomy line and upper lip. The distribution of the changed points was within a roughly triangular area between the 2 nasolabial folds and the upper lip. In group 2, the soft-tissue changes were concentrated just below the infraorbital foramen. The distribution of the affected soft tissue after the high Le Fort I osteotomy was within the rectangular malar region between the 2 infraorbital foramens and the upper lip.