Abstract
Sagittal split ramus osteotomy (SSRO) is a standard surgical technique for patients with mandibular prognathism. However, the appropriate position of the proximal fragment is not strictly defined, and rigid fixation can induce early postoperative skeletal relapse and temporomandibular (TMJ) disorders. Loose fixation can be expected to seat the proximal bone fragments in a physiologically appropriate position, thereby reducing adverse events. Although long-term skeletal stability has been achieved using SSRO without fixation, the evaluation of preoperative and postoperative eating and swallowing functions remains unclear, and this study aimed to clarify this point. We evaluated mastication time, oral transfer time, and pharyngeal transfer time using videofluorography (VF) preoperatively, two months postoperatively, and six months postoperatively, and along with the position of anatomical landmarks using cephalometric radiographs, modified water swallowing test (MWST), food test (FT), and repetitive saliva swallowing test (RSST) were used to evaluate postoperative swallowing function. Four patients (one male, three females; mean (range) age 26.5 (18–51) years) were included, with a mean setback of 9.5 mm and 6.5 mm on the right and left sides, respectively. Postoperative eating and swallowing functions were good in VF, cephalometric analysis, MWST, FT, and RSST. In the present study, good results for postoperative eating and swallowing functions were obtained in SSRO with loose fixation of the proximal and distal bone segments.
Subject
Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis,Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
Reference16 articles.
1. Stability of single-jaw vs two-jaw surgery following the correction of skeletal class III malocclusion: A systematic review and meta-analysis;Rizk;Orthod. Craniofac. Res.,2021
2. Interferences between mandibular proximal and distal segments in orthognathic surgery for patients with asymmetric mandibular prognathism depending on different osteotomy techniques;Yang;Oral Surg. Oral Med. Oral Pathol. Oral Radiol. Endodontol.,2010
3. Indications to the use of condylar repositioning devices in the surgical treatment of dental-skeletal class III;Renzi;J. Oral Maxillofac. Surg.,2003
4. Condylar positioning devices for orthognathic surgery: A literature review;Costa;Oral Surg. Oral Med. Oral Pathol. Oral Radiol. Endodontol.,2008
5. Peleg, O., Mahmoud, R., Shuster, A., Arbel, S., Kleinman, S., Mijiritsky, E., and Ianculovici, C. (2022). Vertical Ramus Osteotomy, Is It Still a Valid Tool in Orthognathic Surgery?. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health, 19.