Stokbro Kasper, Liebregts Jeroen, Baan Frank, Bell R Bryan, Maal Thomas, Thygesen Torben, Xi Tong
PhD Fellow and Oral and Maxillofacial Surgical Resident, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark.
PhD Fellow and Oral and Maxillofacial Surgical Resident, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2019 Sep;77(9):1882-1893. doi: 10.1016/j.joms.2019.03.023. Epub 2019 Apr 4.
In bimaxillary procedures, it is important to know how the chosen sequence affects the surgical outcome. The purpose of this study was to explore whether the theoretical advantages of using the mandible-first procedure were supported by clinical data.
The authors performed a retrospective investigation on a cohort compiled from 3 published retrospective studies. The sample was composed of patients treated at the Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre (Nijmegen, the Netherlands) from 2010 to 2014 and the Odense University Hospital (Odense, Denmark) from 2011 to 2015. The inclusion criterion was bimaxillary surgery without maxillary segmentation. The exclusion criterion was lack of a virtual surgical plan. The primary outcome variable was surgical accuracy, defined as the mean difference between the obtained outcome and the virtual surgical plan. The primary predictor variable was the comparison between mandible-first and maxilla-first sequencing. Secondary predictors were inferior maxillary repositioning and counterclockwise (CCW) rotation. The confounding variable was the virtually planned reposition. Results were analyzed by mixed-model regression encompassing all variables, followed by a detailed analysis of positive results using 2-sample t tests.
Overall, 145 patients were included for analysis (98 women; mean age, 28 years). Operating on the mandible first notably influenced maxillary positioning and placed the maxilla 1.5 mm posterior and with 1.4° of CCW rotation compared with virtual surgical planning. The interaction of surgical sequence with maxillary rotation showed similar surgical accuracy between maxilla-first surgery with clockwise rotation and mandible-first surgery with CCW rotation. Inferior maxillary repositioning resulted in the maxilla being placed 1.7 mm (maxilla-first sequence) and 2.0 mm (mandible-first sequence) posterior to the planned position.
Surgical accuracy was considerably influenced by sequencing in bimaxillary procedures. It remains important to know how the chosen sequence affects the surgical outcome so that the virtual surgical plan can be adjusted accordingly.
在双颌手术中,了解所选手术顺序如何影响手术结果非常重要。本研究的目的是探讨采用下颌骨优先手术的理论优势是否得到临床数据的支持。
作者对从3项已发表的回顾性研究中汇总的队列进行了回顾性调查。样本由2010年至2014年在荷兰奈梅亨拉德堡德大学医学中心(奈梅亨)以及2011年至2015年在丹麦欧登塞大学医院(欧登塞)接受治疗的患者组成。纳入标准为未进行上颌骨分割的双颌手术。排除标准为缺乏虚拟手术计划。主要结局变量为手术准确性,定义为获得的结果与虚拟手术计划之间的平均差异。主要预测变量为下颌骨优先与上颌骨优先手术顺序的比较。次要预测因素为上颌骨向下复位和逆时针(CCW)旋转。混杂变量为虚拟计划的复位。通过包含所有变量的混合模型回归分析结果,随后使用双样本t检验对阳性结果进行详细分析。
总体而言,纳入145例患者进行分析(98例女性;平均年龄28岁)。与虚拟手术计划相比,先对下颌骨进行手术显著影响上颌骨定位,使上颌骨向后移位1.5 mm,并伴有1.4°的逆时针旋转。手术顺序与上颌骨旋转的相互作用表明,顺时针旋转的上颌骨优先手术与逆时针旋转的下颌骨优先手术之间的手术准确性相似。上颌骨向下复位导致上颌骨在计划位置后方1.7 mm(上颌骨优先顺序)和2.0 mm(下颌骨优先顺序)。
双颌手术中的手术顺序对手术准确性有显著影响。了解所选顺序如何影响手术结果仍然很重要,以便能够相应地调整虚拟手术计划。