bimaxillary surgery
Recently Published Documents


TOTAL DOCUMENTS

149
(FIVE YEARS 39)

H-INDEX

25
(FIVE YEARS 2)

Author(s):  
Michael Schwaiger ◽  
Sarah-Jayne Edmondson ◽  
Jasmin Rabensteiner ◽  
Florian Prüller ◽  
Thomas Gary ◽  
...  

Abstract Objective The objectives of this prospective cohort study were to establish gender-related differences in blood loss and haemostatic profiles associated with bimaxillary surgery. In addition, we aimed to identify if any gender differences could be established which might help predict blood loss volume. Materials and methods Fifty-four patients (22 males; 32 females) undergoing bimaxillary surgery for skeletal dentofacial deformities were eligible for inclusion. Blood samples were taken 1 day preoperatively and 48 h postoperatively for detailed gender-specific coagulation analysis incorporating global coagulation assays (endogenous thrombin potential) and specific coagulation parameters. Blood loss was measured at two different time points: (1) the end of surgery, visible intraoperative blood loss (IOB) using ‘subtraction method’; and (2) 48 h postoperatively perioperative bleeding volume (CBL-48 h) using ‘haemoglobin-balance method’ and Nadler’s formula. Correlation and regression analyses were performed to identify relevant parameters affecting the amount of blood loss. Results Significant differences in IOB and CBL-48 h were observed (p < 0.001). Men had higher IOB versus women, lacking statistical significance (p = 0.056). In contrast, men had significantly higher CLB-48 h (p = 0.019). Reduced CBL-48 h was shown to be most closely associated with the level of Antithrombin-III being decreased in females. Conclusions Male gender is associated with higher IOB and CBL-48 compared with females. Gender does not affect IOB regarding haemostatic profile but does correlate strongly with procedure length. Conversely, CBL-48 is closely associated with gender-specific imbalances in the anticoagulant system. Clinical relevance Knowledge of gender-related differences will help clinicians establish predictive factors regarding excessive blood loss in orthognathic surgery and identify at-risk patients.


2021 ◽  
Vol 79 (10) ◽  
pp. e69-e70
Author(s):  
J.A. Gulko ◽  
B.R. Carr ◽  
T.W. Neal ◽  
R. Sarmento ◽  
N. Kolar ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  

Author(s):  
No Eul Kang ◽  
Dae Hun Lee ◽  
Ja In Seo ◽  
Jeong Keun Lee ◽  
Seung Il Song

Abstract Background This study evaluated the pharyngeal airway space changes up to 1 year after bilateral sagittal split osteotomy mandibular setback surgery and bimaxillary surgery with maxillary posterior impaction through three-dimensional computed tomography analysis. Methods A total of 37 patients diagnosed with skeletal class III malocclusion underwent bilateral sagittal split osteotomy setback surgery only (group 1, n = 23) or bimaxillary surgery with posterior impaction (group 2, n = 14). Cone-beam computed tomography scans were taken before surgery (T0), 2 months after surgery (T1), 6 months after surgery (T2), and 1 year after surgery (T3). The nasopharynx (Nph), oropharynx (Oph), hypopharynx (Hph) volume, and anteroposterior distance were measured through the InVivo Dental Application version 5. Results In group 1, Oph AP, Oph volume, Hph volume, and whole pharynx volume were significantly decreased after the surgery (T1) and maintained. In group 2, Oph volume and whole pharynx volume were decreased (T2) and relapsed at 1 year postoperatively (T3). Conclusion In class III malocclusion patients, mandibular setback surgery only showed a greater reduction in pharyngeal airway than bimaxillary surgery at 1 year postoperatively, and bimaxillary surgery was more stable in terms of airway. Therefore, it is important to evaluate the airway before surgery and include it in the surgical plan.


Author(s):  
Li-Chen Liu ◽  
Ying-An Chen ◽  
Ruei-Feng Chen ◽  
Chuan-Fong Yao ◽  
Yu-Fang Liao ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Michael Boelstoft Holte ◽  
Alexandru Diaconu ◽  
Janne Ingerslev ◽  
Jens Jørgen Thorn ◽  
Else Marie Pinholt

JPRAS Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 28 ◽  
pp. 90-96
Author(s):  
A.R. Bouter ◽  
P.A. van Twisk ◽  
P.J. van Doormaal ◽  
B.J. Emmer ◽  
M.J. Koudstaal

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document