Positional change in mandibular condyle in facial asymmetric patients after orthognathic surgery: cone-beam computed tomography study
10.1186/s40902-018-0152-6
- Author:
Byung Joon CHOI
1
;
Byung Soo KIM
;
Ji Min LIM
;
Junho JUNG
;
Jung Woo LEE
;
Joo Young OHE
Author Information
1. Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, School of Dentistry, Kyung Hee University, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
Asymmetry;
Condyle position;
CBCT
- MeSH:
Cone-Beam Computed Tomography;
Facial Asymmetry;
Head;
Humans;
Malocclusion;
Mandibular Condyle;
Methods;
Orthognathic Surgery;
Osteotomy, Sagittal Split Ramus;
Prognathism
- From:Maxillofacial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery
2018;40(1):13-
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:English
-
Abstract:
BACKGROUND: We evaluated change in the mandibular condyle after orthognathic surgery using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) in patients with facial asymmetry. METHODS: Thirty patients with skeletal class III malocclusion and mandibular prognathism or facial asymmetry were classified into two groups according to the amount of menton deviation (MD) from the facial midline on anteroposterior (AP) cephalogram: group A (asymmetry, MD ≥ 4 mm; n = 15) and group B (symmetry, MD < 4 mm; n = 15). Position and angle of condylar heads on the axial, sagittal, and coronal views were measured within 1 month preoperatively (T0) and postoperatively (T1) and 6 months (T2) postoperatively. RESULTS: On axial view, both groups showed inward rotation of condylar heads at T1, but at T2, the change was gradually removed and the condylar head returned to its original position. At T1, both groups showed no AP condylar head changes on sagittal view, although downward movement of the condylar heads occurred. Then, at T2, the condylar heads tended to return to their original position. The change in distance between the two condylar heads showed that they had moved outward in both groups, causing an increase in the width between the two heads postoperatively. Analysis of all three-dimensional changes of the condylar head positions demonstrated statistically significant changes in the three different CBCT views in group B and no statistically significant changes in group A. CONCLUSIONS: There was no significant difference between the two groups in condylar head position. Because sagittal split ramus osteotomy can be performed without significant change in symmetrical and asymmetrical cases, it can be regarded as an effective method to stabilize the condylar head position in patients with skeletal class III malocclusion and mandibular prognathism or facial asymmetry.
