Comparison of changes in the condylar volume and morphology in skeletal class iii deformities undergoing orthognathic surgery using a customized versus conventional miniplate: A retrospective analysis

6Citations
Citations of this article
30Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

With the great leap in the development of three-dimensional computer-assisted surgical technology, surgeons can use a variety of assistive methods to achieve better results and evaluate surgical outcomes in detail. This retrospective study aimed to evaluate the postoperative stability after bilateral sagittal split ramus osteotomy by volume rendering methods and to evaluate how postoperative stability differs depending on the type of surgical plate. Of the patients who underwent BSSRO, ten patients in each group (non-customized miniplate and customized miniplate) who met the inclusion criteria were selected. Preoperative and postoperative cone-beam computed tomography data were collected, and condylar morphological and landmark measurements were obtained using Checkpoint and OnDemand software, respectively. The postoperative condylar morphological dataset revealed no significant difference (p > 0.05) between the two groups. No significant difference (p > 0.05) was observed between the two groups in horizontal, vertical, or angular landmark measurements used to quantify operational stability. These results indicate that there is no difference in the surgical outcome between the patient-specific system and the conventional method, which will allow clinicians to take advantage of the patient-specific system for this surgical procedure, with favorable results, as with the conventional method.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Lim, Y. N., Park, I. Y., Kim, J. C., Byun, S. H., & Yang, B. E. (2020). Comparison of changes in the condylar volume and morphology in skeletal class iii deformities undergoing orthognathic surgery using a customized versus conventional miniplate: A retrospective analysis. Journal of Clinical Medicine, 9(9), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm9092794

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free