Comparison of biomechanical behaviour of maxilla following Le Fort I osteotomy with 2- versus 4-plate fixation using 3D-FEA. Part 1: Advancement surgery

Ataç, Mustafa Sancar; Erkmen, Erkan; Yücel, Ertan; Kurt, Ahmet

doi:10.1016/j.ijom.2008.10.004

Cited by 42 publications

(34 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The convergence of the results was examined using the results of the principal maximum values for vertical load on cortical bone with changing number of elements and final numbers of validated elements and nodes ( Table 2). The chewing forces applied were the same as those used in the first part of the study to facilitate comparison 2,9 . The left side was assessed as the balancing side.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The restoration of normal jaw function, optimal facial aesthetics and long-term stability are the goals of successful orthognathic surgery 2,3 . The development of surgical procedures to reposition the maxilla superiorly have allowed the successful treatment of many dentofacial deformities that previously could not be managed 19 .…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Factors that may affect the stability of the Le Fort I osteotomy include presurgical and postsurgical orthodontic stability, scar retraction, interference with the nasal septum, nonpassive positioning of the maxilla, quality of the resulting occlusion and the type of internal fixation 1,5,6,18 . The relationship between the type of fixation 10.005, available online at http://www.sciencedirect.com and stability of the Le Fort I osteotomy for impaction has been studied by many authors 2,4,17,19,20,24 .…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Comparison of biomechanical behaviour of maxilla following Le Fort I osteotomy with 2- versus 4-plate fixation using 3D-FEA

Ataç

Erkmen

Yücel

et al. 2009

International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Comparison of biomechanical behaviour of maxilla following Le Fort I osteotomy with 2- versus 4-plate fixation using 3D-FEA

Ataç

Erkmen

Yücel

et al. 2009

International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The multidirectional chewing forces were defined as those used in the previous studies to facilitate comparison 2,3,11 . In order to provide clear visualization of the stress concentration in the three different maxillary movement models, the interpositional graft has not been simulated in this series.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of biomechanical behaviour of maxilla following Le Fort I osteotomy with 2- versus 4-plate fixation using 3D-FEA

Erkmen

Ataç

Yücel

et al. 2009

International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…A maxillary surface model was created by three-dimensional (3D) scanning (Breuckmann Inc., Meersburg, Germany) of a maxillary model (QS7/E; Somso modelle, Coburg, Germany) 8,9 . Rapid Form software (INUS Technology Inc., Seoul, Korea) then converted the maxillary surface model into 3D solid model.…”

Section: Model Creationmentioning

confidence: 99%

A comparison of fixation methods using three-dimensional finite element analysis following anterior segmental osteotomy

Yun

Park

et al. 2012

J Korean Assoc Oral Maxillofac Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

(J Korean Assoc Oral Maxillofac Surg 2012;38:332-6) Objectives: This study sought to evaluate fixation methods and determine the best method for the postoperative stabilization of maxillary osteotomy. For our analysis we performed a three-dimensional finite element analysis of stress distribution on the plate, screw, and surrounding bone, as well as displacement onto the plate. Materials and Methods: We generated a model using synthetic skull scan data; an initital surface model was changed to a solid model using software. Modified anterior segmental osteotomy (using Park's method) was made using the program, and four different types of fixation methods were used. An anterior load of 100 N was applied on the palatal surface of two central incisors. Results:The Type 1 (L-shaped) fixation method gave stresses of 187.8 MPa at the plate, 45.8 MPa at the screw, and 15.4 MPa at the bone around the plate. The Type 2 (I-shaped) fixation method gave stresses of 186.6 MPa at the plate, 75.7 MPa at the screw, and 13.8 MPa at the bone around the plate. The Type 3 (inverted L-shaped) fixation method gave stresses of 28.6 MPa at the plate, 29.9 MPa at the screw, and 15.3 MPa at the bone around the plate. The Type 4 (I-shaped) fixation method gave stresses of 34.8 MPa at the plate, 36.9 MPa at the screw, and 14.9 MPa at the bone around the plate. The deflection of the plates for the four fixation methods was 0.014 mm, 0.022 mm, 0.017 mm, and 0.018 mm, respectively. Conclusion: The Type 3 (inverted L-shaped) fixation method offers more stability than the other fixation methods. We therefore recommend this method for the postoperative stabilization of maxillary osteotomy.

show abstract

Comparison of biomechanical behaviour of maxilla following Le Fort I osteotomy with 2- versus 4-plate fixation using 3D-FEA. Part 1: Advancement surgery

Cited by 42 publications

References 19 publications

Comparison of biomechanical behaviour of maxilla following Le Fort I osteotomy with 2- versus 4-plate fixation using 3D-FEA

Comparison of biomechanical behaviour of maxilla following Le Fort I osteotomy with 2- versus 4-plate fixation using 3D-FEA

Comparison of biomechanical behaviour of maxilla following Le Fort I osteotomy with 2- versus 4-plate fixation using 3D-FEA

A comparison of fixation methods using three-dimensional finite element analysis following anterior segmental osteotomy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About