Comparison of Posttreatment Stability Between Mandibular Setback Surgery-Early and Conventional Surgery in Class III Patients: A 4.6-Year Follow-Up.

OBJECTIVES: This retrospective study aims to compare long-term stability between the mandibular setback surgery-early (MSE) approach, involving minimal orthodontics, and the mandibular setback conventional surgery (MCS) approach, involving sufficient orthodontics, in Class III patients with mandibular prognathism. METHODS: Among 210 patients who underwent orthognathic surgery, a total of 40 subjects were enrolled based on standardized inclusion criteria: only mandibular surgery, <5 mm setback difference between right and left of the mandible, orthodontics with fixed appliances, and more than 2 years of follow-up after treatment. These patients were allocated to the MSE (n = 20) and MCS groups (n = 20) according to the duration of presurgical orthodontics. Changes in cephalometric measurements were compared between the MSE and MCS groups before surgery (T0), 1 month after surgery (T1), at the end of treatment (T2), and posttreatment retention (T3). RESULTS: The MSE and MCS groups had a mean presurgical orthodontic duration of 2 and 9.5 months, respectively. From T1 to T2, the MSE group showed a significantly larger forward movement of the mandible than the MCS group (2.1 versus 0.7 mm; P < 0.001). In addition, from T2 to T3 (average 4.6 years), the MSE group presented anterior relapse of 0.6 mm in the mandible, but there were no statistically significant intergroup differences. CONCLUSION: Although the MSE group showed greater postsurgical forward mandibular relapse than the MCS group, the two groups exhibited similar skeletal and dental stability during the posttreatment retention.

Accuracy of a surface-based fusion method when integrating digital models and the cone beam computed tomography scans with metal artifacts.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the intra- and inter-observer reliability of maxillary digital dental model integration into cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans to reconstruct three-dimensional (3D) skeletodental models for orthognathic patients. This retrospective study consisted of CBCT and digital maxillary dentition images of 20 Class III orthognathic patients. After two repeated fusions of digital cast images with reconstructed CBCT images by a digital engineer and an orthodontist respectively, the 3D coordinate values of the canines, first molars, and central incisors were evaluated. The intra- and inter-observer reliability of 3D positions of maxillary teeth were compared using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs). Intra-observer reliability of x-, y-, and z-coordinate values of maxillary teeth showed significant and excellent agreement in an engineer (0.946 ≤ ICC ≤ 1.000) and an orthodontist (0.876 ≤ ICC ≤ 1.000). The inter-observer reliability of the y- and z-coordinates of each tooth was significantly excellent or good, but that of the x-coordinates showed insignificantly poor to moderate agreement. This study showed that the integration of maxillary digital models into CBCT scans was clinically reliable. However, considering the low inter-observer reliability on the x-coordinates of dentition, clinical experience and repeated learning are needed for accurate application of digital skeletodental model in orthognathic patients.

Analysis of Sagittal Position Changes of the Condyle After Mandibular Setback Surgery Across the Four Different Types of Plating Systems.

ABSTRACT: The authors analyzed the three-dimensional postoperative condylar position change across the plating systems. This retrospective study was conducted with the patients who underwent bilateral sagittal split ramus osteotomy with setback surgery. The condylar change was analyzed from preoperative cone-beam computed tomography to postoperative 1 month (T1) and postoperative 6 months (T2) using superimposition software, automatically merging based on the anterior cranial base. The condylar changes during T1 and T2 were analyzed across the four types of plates (4-hole sliding, heart-shaped, 3-hole sliding, and 4-hole conventional) Mean intraclass correlation coefficient values were consistently high for each measurement (>0.850). During T1, the conventional plate had a decreased condylar anterior distance when compared with the 3-hole sliding plate (P = 0.032). During T2, the conventional plate had an increased condylar posterior distance when compared with the 3-hole sliding plate (P = 0.031). Superimposition software based on the anterior cranial base could be available for measurement of condylar position with highly reproducible results. After bilateral sagittal split ramus osteotomy, the 3-hole sliding plate could effectively compensate for the anterior displacement of the condyle compared to other plates.

Accuracy of intraoral scan images in full arch with orthodontic brackets: a retrospective in vivo study.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this retrospective study was to evaluate the accuracy of intraoral scan (IOS) images in the maxillary and mandibular arches with orthodontic brackets. MATERIAL AND METHODS: From digital impressions of 140 patients who underwent orthodontic treatment, consecutive IOS images were selected based on standardized inclusion criteria: Two pre-orthodontic IOS images (IOS1 and IOS2) of permanent dentition with fully erupted second molars and IOS images obtained immediately after orthodontic bracket bonding (IOSb). Superimpositions were performed to evaluate the reproducibility of repeated IOS images. Accuracy of IOSb images was analyzed by comparing the average surface errors between IOS1c and IOS2c images, which were IOS images cut based on the same region of the interest as between IOS1 and IOSb images. RESULTS: A total of 84 IOS images was analyzed. The average surface errors between IOS1 and IOS2 images were 57 ± 8 µm and 59 ± 14 µm in the maxillary and mandibular arch, respectively, and their reliability was almost perfect. The average errors between IOSb and IOS1c images exhibited an increase, which measured 97 ± 28 µm in the maxillary arch and 95 ± 29 µm in the mandibular arch. These surface deviations between IOSb and IOS1c images were significantly larger in each region as well as entire dentition (P < 0.001) compared to those between IOS1c and IOS2c images. CONCLUSIONS: The average surface errors of the scans with brackets showed increased values compared with those without brackets. This suggests that orthodontic brackets could affect the trueness of intraoral scan images. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: It is necessary for clinicians to consider the effect of brackets on digital impression when using IOS images in orthodontic patients.