Management of severe skeletal Class III malocclusion with bimaxillary orthognathic surgery

Haryani, Jitesh; Nagar, Amit; Mehrotra, Divya; Ranabhatt, Rani

doi:10.4103/0976-237x.194113

Cited by 11 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Orthosurgical treatments are usually timed in the beginning of the adult life, when growth is near completion. When the choice is an early orthosurgical treatment, the need of an eventual second surgery in the future is always real, and it should be carefully considered (Teixeira et al, 2007;Haryani et al, 2016).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Early Orthosurgical Treatment of a Skeletal Class III: Can the Self-Esteem Be Improved?

Portela¹,

Pitman²,

Cal-Neto³

2022

FMCR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Young patients with a skeletal Class III malocclusion with a strong psychological and appearance impact may require surgical correction during their growth. This case report describes the orthosurgical treatment of a 11-year-old boy with history of bullying, presenting severe Class III skeletal malocclusion, anterior cross-bite and mandibular prognathism. He also had significant vertical and anteroposterior discrepancies and a concave profile with prominent lips. The treatment plan included extraction of the first premolars, a maxillary LeFort I osteotomy and a mandibular bilateral sagittal split osteotomy. The orthodontic treatment combined with the two-jaw surgery improved his jaws alignment, occlusal function, and the most important: his self-esteem and quality of life.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Early Orthosurgical Treatment of a Skeletal Class III: Can the Self-Esteem Be Improved?

Portela¹,

Pitman²,

Cal-Neto³

2022

FMCR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…H.S. Baik 2000 shows that orthodontists need to be aware of the potential restriction and that an accurate analysis of the cephalometric radiograph is required to plan a proper course of treatment [9,15].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative Assessment of Perception about Angle Inclination of Mandibular and Maxillary Incisors on the Cephalometric Analysis between Skeletal Class 3 and Orthognathic Cases

Hija

Allon

2022

Applied Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Before orthognathic surgery, a thorough diagnosis of the maxillofacial structure is performed for combined orthodontic–surgical treatment planning. One of the tools that are used for this collaboration is the cephalometric radiograph. Cephalometric analysis is a method for measuring the location of specific anatomical landmarks upon a cephalogram. Some of these parameters are more difficult to define accurately in cases of dentofacial deformities. Therefore, the data obtained from different examiners are characterized by high variability. The present study aimed to examine whether there is a significant variation in the physicians’ measurements between orthognathic Class I (normal) cases and the cases of skeletal deformity Class III. The study involved ten physicians with a mean age of 27. All physicians underwent appropriate instruction for reading and analyzing cephalometric radiographs, and all physicians were instructed about their role in the study. Each participant received 100 cephalometric radiographs, consisting of 50 radiographs of patients with a regular facial structure (Class-I = orthognathic) and 50 photographs of patients with a specific skeletal deformity (Class-III = prognathic). According to the Frankfort Horizontal plane, each physician marked the upper incisor (U1) longitudinal axis on the radiograph and the lower incisor (L1) longitudinal axis according to the mandibular plane. Then, we measured the angle degree with the Cephninja® application. Afterward, we performed a statistical analysis of the t-test with Bonferroni correction to check whether there is a significantly large standard deviation between the indices in the orthognathic cases compared to the prognathic cases. In the group of physicians who participated in this sample of these cephalometric radiographs, we found that in prognathic patients, the upper incisor angle measurements showed significantly more t variance relative to those physicians’ corresponding measurements radiographs of orthognathic patients. Variability increases as skeletal deformity become more severe (p = 0.026) in U1 TO FH and (p = 0.014) L1 TO MP. Cephalometric measurements, which are essential for the correct diagnosis and planning of combined orthodontic treatment, suffer from a significant examiner-based bias that is greater as deformity becomes more severe. This conclusion has implications for the accuracy of the model on which the entire plan process of the combined treatment of facial and jaw deformities is based. The surgeon should use CBCT (cone-beam computed tomography) for its three-dimensional superiority over cephalometric imaging, which will result in a more accurate evaluation of surgery planning and performance.

show abstract

“…After orthognathic surgery, the esthetics of the facial profile and occlusion was improved significantly.7-8 months malocclusions classified into 3 types: pseudo, dentoalveolar, and skeletal [3,4]. The etiology of Class III malocclusion is multifactorial, with genetic, ethnic, environmental, and habitual components [5]. Orthognathic surgery is a first approach to treat Class III malocclusion and can be addressed with various surgical approaches [6,7].…”

Section: Surgical Techniquementioning

confidence: 99%

Assessment of the Success of Oral Rehabilitation of Patients with with Teeth Loss and Class III Skeletal Malocclusion

Hakobyan¹,

Khachatryan²,

Khachatryan³

et al. 2021

Archives Oral Maxillofac Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: The objective of the study is to assess treatment success of teeth loss patients with class III skeletal malocclusion through a multidisciplinary approach, including orthognathic surgery and implant prosthetic rehabilitation. Materials and Methods:The present retrospective study aimed at investigating the 5-year clinical treatments outcomes 16 patients with class III malocclusion and teeth loss. Clinical, laboratory, radiological methods were used in the examination of patients. Surgical stage included sagittal bilateral osteotomy of the lower jaw and reposition it back, Le Fort I osteotomy, 7-8 months after the orthognathic surgery 132 implants were inserted. After 2 to 4 months of submerged healing period patients had received implant-fixed prostheses. Results:No serious intraoperative or immediate postoperative complications were noted. At the control examination after 6 months after surgery, an X-ray examination we did not observe any clinical or radiological signs of inflammation in the area of osteotomy sites and titanium mini plates. Success rate of implants 5 years after was 96.2%. Conclusion:After orthognathic surgery and dental implant prosthetic rehabilitation, the masticatory function, esthetics of the facial profile and occlusion was improved. Patients expressed satisfaction with the result of treatment and improved quality of life.

show abstract

Management of severe skeletal Class III malocclusion with bimaxillary orthognathic surgery

Cited by 11 publications

References 11 publications

Early Orthosurgical Treatment of a Skeletal Class III: Can the Self-Esteem Be Improved?

Early Orthosurgical Treatment of a Skeletal Class III: Can the Self-Esteem Be Improved?

Comparative Assessment of Perception about Angle Inclination of Mandibular and Maxillary Incisors on the Cephalometric Analysis between Skeletal Class 3 and Orthognathic Cases

Assessment of the Success of Oral Rehabilitation of Patients with with Teeth Loss and Class III Skeletal Malocclusion

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About