Anterior open bite correction by Le Fort I osteotomy with or without anterior segmentation: which is more stable?

Abstract A retrospective cohort study was conducted to analyze the relapse rate of anterior open bite (AOB) correction comparing Le Fort I osteotomy with and without anterior segmentation. The risk factors that might contribute to relapse were also assessed. Lateral cephalograms obtained at six diff...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inInternational journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery Vol. 46; no. 6; pp. 766 - 773
Main Authors Ismail, I.N, Leung, Y.Y
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Denmark Elsevier Ltd 01.06.2017
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:Abstract A retrospective cohort study was conducted to analyze the relapse rate of anterior open bite (AOB) correction comparing Le Fort I osteotomy with and without anterior segmentation. The risk factors that might contribute to relapse were also assessed. Lateral cephalograms obtained at six different times were analyzed. A total of 81 patients with AOB were recruited. Thirty-five patients underwent Le Fort I osteotomy without anterior segmentation and 46 patients underwent anterior segmentation. Le Fort I osteotomy with anterior segmentation resulted in significantly more AOB relapse when compared to that without anterior segmentation at 7 weeks postoperative (15.2% vs. 0%, P = 0.016). During the early postoperative period, factors that contributed to AOB relapse in Le Fort I osteotomy with anterior segmentation were AOB closure ≥4 mm and inferior positioning of the anterior segment >2 mm. Over the long term, AOB closure ≥4 mm and intraoral vertical ramus osteotomy as the only mandibular procedure were factors identified as causing more AOB relapse in those treated by Le Fort I osteotomy with anterior segmentation. In conclusion, Le Fort I osteotomy without anterior segmentation was found to be more stable in the surgical correction of AOB in the early and late postoperative periods.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
ISSN:0901-5027
1399-0020
DOI:10.1016/j.ijom.2017.02.1275