Next Article in Journal
CD44 Mediates Oral Squamous Cell Carcinoma-Promoting Activity of MRE11 via AKT Signaling
Previous Article in Journal
The Impact of Concomitant Proton Pump Inhibitors on Immunotherapy Efficacy among Patients with Urothelial Carcinoma: A Meta-Analysis
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

In Vivo Accuracy of a New Digital Planning System in Terms of Jaw Relation, Extent of Surgical Movements and the Hierarchy of Stability in Orthognathic Surgery

1
Department of Orthodontics, University of Münster, Albert-Schweitzer-Campus 1, 48149 Münster, Germany
2
Department of Cranio-Maxillofacial Surgery, University Hospital Münster, Albert-Schweitzer-Campus 1, 48149 Münster, Germany
3
Department of Prosthetic Dentistry and Biomaterials, University Hospital Münster, Albert-Schweitzer-Campus 1, 48149 Münster, Germany
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
These authors contributed equally to this work.
J. Pers. Med. 2022, 12(5), 843; https://doi.org/10.3390/jpm12050843
Submission received: 18 April 2022 / Revised: 13 May 2022 / Accepted: 16 May 2022 / Published: 21 May 2022

Abstract

This retrospective cohort study compares the virtual planned and postoperative jaw positions in patients undergoing orthognathic surgery. Surgery was virtually planned with the Digital Münster Model Surgery system (DMMS). Primary outcome: Spatial difference in the maxillo-mandibulo relation between virtual planning and postoperative result. Secondary outcome: Possible relationship between the measured differences and surgical movements as well as the postoperative stability according to Proffit. Ninety female and sixty-one male patients were included in the study. The average translation errors were 0.54 ± 0.50 mm (anteroposterior), 0.37 ± 0.33 mm (mediolateral), and 0.33 ± 0.28 mm (superoinferior). Orientation errors were 0.86 ± 0.79 degrees (yaw), 0.54 ± 0.48 degrees (roll), and 0.90 ± 0.72 degrees (pitch). The surgical procedures do not differ with respect to their error sizes. Maxilla forward and class II maxilla up with mandible forward are the most precise procedures. Most significant differences were found in the anteroposterior direction, whereby the extent of the surgical movement has no effect on the magnitude of the error. The process of planning with the DMMS followed by surgery is highly accurate and shows error values well below the clinically accepted limit of two millimeters in translation and four degrees in rotation.
Keywords: orthognathic surgery; virtual planning; orthodontics orthognathic surgery; virtual planning; orthodontics

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Stamm, T.; Andriyuk, E.; Kleinheinz, J.; Jung, S.; Dirksen, D.; Middelberg, C. In Vivo Accuracy of a New Digital Planning System in Terms of Jaw Relation, Extent of Surgical Movements and the Hierarchy of Stability in Orthognathic Surgery. J. Pers. Med. 2022, 12, 843. https://doi.org/10.3390/jpm12050843

AMA Style

Stamm T, Andriyuk E, Kleinheinz J, Jung S, Dirksen D, Middelberg C. In Vivo Accuracy of a New Digital Planning System in Terms of Jaw Relation, Extent of Surgical Movements and the Hierarchy of Stability in Orthognathic Surgery. Journal of Personalized Medicine. 2022; 12(5):843. https://doi.org/10.3390/jpm12050843

Chicago/Turabian Style

Stamm, Thomas, Eugenia Andriyuk, Johannes Kleinheinz, Susanne Jung, Dieter Dirksen, and Claudius Middelberg. 2022. "In Vivo Accuracy of a New Digital Planning System in Terms of Jaw Relation, Extent of Surgical Movements and the Hierarchy of Stability in Orthognathic Surgery" Journal of Personalized Medicine 12, no. 5: 843. https://doi.org/10.3390/jpm12050843

APA Style

Stamm, T., Andriyuk, E., Kleinheinz, J., Jung, S., Dirksen, D., & Middelberg, C. (2022). In Vivo Accuracy of a New Digital Planning System in Terms of Jaw Relation, Extent of Surgical Movements and the Hierarchy of Stability in Orthognathic Surgery. Journal of Personalized Medicine, 12(5), 843. https://doi.org/10.3390/jpm12050843

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop