Skeletal changes in patients with mandibular prognathism after mandibular set back and bimaxillary surgery – A comparative cephalometric study

Vladimir Sinobad; Ljiljana Strajnić; Tamara Sinobad

doi:10.2298/VSP171017087S

Vladimir Sinobad University of Belgrade, Faculty of Dental Medicine, Clinic for Maxillofacial Surgery
Ljiljana Strajnić Clinic for Dentistry of Vojvodina, Novi Sad
Tamara Sinobad Zepter Dental Polyclinic, Belgrade

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2298/VSP171017087S

Keywords: malocclusion, angle class III;, oral surgical procedures;, cephalometry;, maxilla;, mandible;, treatment outcome

Abstract

Bacground/Aim. Recently, maxillary and bimaxillary surgery gained the primacy in the surgical correction of class III deformities. The aim of this investigation was to compare the changes in the skeletal relationships in patients with mandibular prognathism after bimaxillary surgery. Methods. The study included 70 subjects divided into three groups. Twenty class III patients of the experimental group 1 underwent bilateral sagittal ramus osteotomy and twenty patients of the experimental group 2 were subjected to bimaxillary surgery. The control group consisted of 30 subjects with skeletal class I and physiological occlusion. Cephalometric research was conducted on 110 lateral cephalometric radiographs made in subjects of the experimental groups 1 and 2 before and after surgery and in subjects of the control group. Using the computer program “Dr. Ceph”, 30 linear and angular skeletal variables were analyzed on each radiograph. Results. Bimaxillary osteotomies changed most of variables that characterize the mandibular prognathism. The changes in the sagittal plane included the significant increase of sella-nasion to the A point (SNA) angle (by 4º on the average) and the A point to B point (ANB) angle (6°), and significant reduction in angles sella-nasion to the B point (SNB) (3º), gonial angle (ArGoMe) (8°), gonial angle inferior (NGoMe) (6.2º), and Björks sum (7°). The vertical relationships were normalized by significant reduction in overall anterior face height N-Me (by 5 mm on the average), the lower anterior face height ANS-Me (4 mm), significant increase in the total posterior face height S-Go (2.5–3 mm), lower posterior face height PNS-Go (4 mm), and significant reduction of the basal and mandibular plane angles. Conclusion. Compared to the isolated mandibular operations, bimaxillary surgery changes more efficiently the sagittal and vertical skeletal relations in patients with class III deformities and harmonizes more successfully the entire skeletal facial profile.

References

Proffit WR, Fields HW Jr, Moray LJ. Prevalence of malocclusion and orthodontic treatment need in the United States: estimates from the NHANES III survey. Int J Adult Orthodon Orthognath Surg 1998; 13(2): 97‒106.

De Clerck HJ, Proffit WR. Growth modification of the face: A current perspective with emphasis on Class III treatment. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2015; 148(1): 37‒46.

Bui C, King T, Proffit W, Frazier-Bowers S. Phenotypic chara-cterization of Class III patients. Angle Orthod 2006; 76(4): 564‒9.

Staudt CB, Kiliaridis S. Different skeletal types underlying Class III malocclusion in a random population. Am J Orthod Den¬tofacial Orthop 2009; 136(5): 715‒21.

Vela CC. Phenotypic characterisation of class CIII maloc-clusion [thesis]. Iowa, US: University of Iowa; 2012.

Trauner R, Obwegeser HL. The surgical correction of mandibular prognathism and retrognathia with consideration of genio¬plasty. I. Surgical procedures to correct mandibular prognat¬hism and reshaping of the chin. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1957; 10(7): 677‒89.

Wyatt WM. Sagittal ramus split osteotomy: literature review and suggested modification of technique. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1997; 35(2): 137‒41.

Wolford LM. The sagittal split ramus osteotomy as the pre-ferred treatment for mandibular prognathism. J Oral Ma-xillofac Surg 2000; 58(3): 310‒2.

MacIntosh RB. Experience with the sagittal osteotomy of the mandibular ramus: a 13-year review. J Maxillofac Surg 1981; 9(3): 151‒65.

Vukadinović M. Facial soft tissue changes after surgical correction of progeny [thesis]. Belgrade: University of Belgrade, Faculty of Dental Medicine; 1993. (Serbian)

Sinobad V. The nature of the change occlusion after surgical correction of mandibular pregnatism [thesis]. Belgrade: Uni-versity of Belgrade, Faculty of Dentistry; 2010. (Serbian)

Bailey LT, Proffit WR, White RP Jr. Trends in surgical treatment of Class III skeletal relationships. Int J Adult Orthodon Orthognath Surg 1995; 10(2): 108‒18.

Turvey TA, White RP. Maxillary surgery. In: Proffit WR, White RP, Sarver DM, editor. Contemporary treatment of Dentofacial deformity. St.Louis, Mo: Mosby; 2003, p. 288‒311.

Proffit WR, White RP. Combined surgical-orthodontic treatment: How did it evolve and what are the best practices now? Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2015; 147(5 Suppl): S205‒15.

Jakobsone G, Stenvik A, Sandvik L, Espeland L. Three-year follow-up of bimaxillary surgery to correct skeletal Class III malocclusion: stability and risk factors for relapse. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2011; 139(1): 80‒9.

Al-Gunaid T, Yamaki M, Takagi R, Saito I. Soft and hard tissue changes after bimaxillary surgery in Japanese class III asymmetric patients. J Orthod Sci 2012; 1(3): 69‒76.

Abeltins A, Jakobsone G, Urtane I, Bigestans A. The stability of bilateral sagittal ramus osteotomy and vertical ramus osteo-tomy after bimaxillary correction of class III maloc¬clusion. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 2011; 39(8): 583‒7.

Sinobad V. Roentgencraniometric evaluation of changes in skeletal and dental relationships after bimaxillary surgical correction of mandibular prognathism [dissertation]. Belgrade: University of Belgrade, Faculty of Dentistry; 2016. (Serbian)

Ellis E 3rd, McNamara JA Jr. Components of adult Class III malocclusion. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1984; 42(5): 295‒305.

Keisha NA. Genetic and phenotypic evaluation of the Class III dentofacial deformity, comparisons of three populations. [thesis]. Chapel Hill, US: University of Nord Carolina, Chapel Hill, Faculty of Dentistry; 2007.

Vukadinović M. Clinical and cephalometric evaluation of sur-gical treatment of progeny. [dissertation]. Belgrade: Univer¬sity of Belgrade, Faculty of Dentistry; 1985. (Serbian)

Gjørup H, Athanasiou AE. Soft-tissue and dentoskeletal profile changes associated with mandibular setback osteotomy. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1991; 100(4): 312‒23.

Pike JB, Sundheim RA. Skeletal and dental responses to orthognathic surgical treatment. Angle Orthod 1997; 67(6): 447‒54.

Joss CU, Thuer WU. Stability of hard tissue profile after man-dibular set-back in sagittal splitt osteotomies: A longitudinal and long-term folow up study. Eur J Orthod 2008: 30(4); 352‒8.

Ghassemi M, Ghassemi A, Showkatbakhsh R, Ahmad SS, Shadab M, Modabber A, et al. Evaluation of soft and hard tissue changes after bimaxillary surgery in class III orthognathic surgery and aesthetic consideration. Natl J Maxillofac Surg 2014; 5(4): 157‒60.

Johnston C, Burden D, Kennedy D, Harradine N, Stevenson M. Class III surgical –orthodontic treatment: A cephalometric study. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2006; 130(3): 300‒9.

Al-Delayme R, Al-Khen M, Hamdoon Z, Jerjes W. Skeletal and dental relapses after skeletal class III deformity correction surgery: single-jaw versus double-jaw procedures. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol 2013; 115(4): 466‒72.

Aydil B, Özer N, Marşan G. Bimaxillary surgery in Class III malocclusion: soft and hard tissue changes. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 2013; 41(3): 254‒7.

Van Sickels JE, Wallender A. Closure of anterior open bites with mandibular surgery: advantages and disadvantages of this approach. Oral Maxillofac Surg 2012; 16(4): 361‒7.

Enacar A, Taner T, Manav O. Effects of single- or double-jaw surgery on vertical dimension in skeletal Class III patients. Int J Adult Orthodon Orthognath Surg 2001; 16(1): 30‒5.