Stability of the Le Fort I osteotomy for maxillary advancement using rigid fixation and porous block hydroxyapatite grafting

Author(s):  
Pushkar Mehra ◽  
Vanessa Castro ◽  
Rogerio Z. Freitas ◽  
Larry M. Wolford
Author(s):  
Ramin Foroughi ◽  
Oveis Khakbaz ◽  
Mehrdad Maneshi

Introduction Maxillary advancementis applied extensively for malocclusion class III correction.This procedure is done using one of the two methods, Conventional or High. Maxilla moves in both vertical and horizontal and only in the horizontal directions in Conventional and High method respectively, so expecting a difference in facialsoft tissue changes. In present study is a case series that describes this issue. Materials and Methods: The cases included 30 patients with class III malocclusion due to maxillary deficiency, whom underwent Le Fort I osteotomy for maxillary advancement in Shahid Beheshti Hospital in Babol, Iran during 1995 to 1995. According to surgical technique, the cases were placed in group 1 (Conventional) or group 2 (High). Maxillary advancement and changes in hard and soft tissue of the middle and lower facial regions where measured through tracing on the lateral cephalometry. Intra-group and inter-group statistical comparisons were done using SPSS20 software at significance level as 0.05. Result: The pre-surgical mean size of SNA, SNB, nasolabial and mentolabial angles was similar in two groups. In all patients, after surgery, SNA angle size was increased and SNB، nasolabial and Mentolabial angles size were decreased. The mean value of these change was similar in two groups. In group 2, the displacement of point A ‘(mean difference: 1.30 mm) and Labrale Superius (mean difference: 1.40 mm) were significantly more than group 1. The amount of displacement of SN (mean difference: 1.30 mm), Labrale Inferius (mean difference: 0.88 mm) and Pogonion (mean difference: 0.23 mm) points in group 2 was higher than that of group 1, but this difference was not statistically significant. Conclusion: It is needed strong evidence for decision about selecting High or Conventional approach maxillary advancement in terms of facial aesthetic aspects. So, further studies with larger sample sizes and cohort or quasi-experimental design is suggested


2019 ◽  
Vol 47 (12) ◽  
pp. 1868-1874
Author(s):  
Roni Harjunpää ◽  
Suvi Alaluusua ◽  
Junnu Leikola ◽  
Arja Heliövaara

1995 ◽  
Vol 53 (3) ◽  
pp. 243-248 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark Egbert ◽  
Brad Hepworth ◽  
Robert Myall ◽  
Roger West

2013 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-6
Author(s):  
Sıdıka Sinem Soydan ◽  
Çağla Şar ◽  
Ayça Arman-Özçırpıcı ◽  
Sina Uçkan

2020 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 93-98
Author(s):  
Letícia Liana Chihara ◽  
Jéssica de Fátima Segantin ◽  
Paulo Esteves Pinto Faria ◽  
Eduardo Sant’Ana ◽  
Eduardo Dias-Ribeiro ◽  
...  

Purpose: The maxillary advancement using Le Fort I osteotomy directly affects in the positioning of the upper lip (UL) and the nasolabial angle (NLA), which plays an important role in facial expression and aesthetics, because of this, the aim of this study was to evaluate the ability of Dolphin Imaging 11.8 software in predicting changes to the UL position and NLA in patients undergoing maxillary advancement. Materials and Methods: It was a retrospective cohort study. Predictive and final tracings using pre- and postoperative Cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) of 24 patients undergoing maxillary advancement, regardless of mandibular movement, were compared. Whether the amount of advancement changes this predictability was also analyzed. The predictive and the 12-month postoperative data were evaluated using Dolphin Imaging 11.8 software and compared. Student t test was used to get the results. Results: The vertical analysis of the incisal tip and cementoenamel junction of the upper central incisor (UCI) and of the UL were statistically significant ( P = .001 for all). The horizontal measurements of the same variables ( P = .238, P = .516, P = .930, respectively) and the NLA ( P = .060) showed no statistical significance. The amount of advancement did not interfere with the variables analyzed, except for the exposure ( P = .009) and inclination of the UCI ( P = .010). Conclusion: It was concluded that the amount of maxillary advancement does not interfere with the UL prediction; the prediction capacity of the software was good for the horizontal measurements, but had a significant error index for vertical measurements.


2009 ◽  
Vol 67 (1) ◽  
pp. 223-228 ◽  
Author(s):  
Antonio Cortese ◽  
Germano Savastano ◽  
Mauro Savastano ◽  
Gianrico Spagnuolo ◽  
Francesco Papa

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document