medigraphic.com
ISSN 2007-3178 (Print)
Asociación Mexicana de Cirugía Bucal y Maxilofacial, Colegio Mexicano de Cirugía Bucal y Maxilofacial, A.C.

2011, Number 2

<< Back Next >>

Rev Mex Cir Bucal Maxilofac 2011; 7 (2)

Medartis orthognathic plate. Comparative study

Dueñas GR, López RVMS, Macías RDM

Language: Spanish
References: 12
Page: 41-45
PDF size: 93.90 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Objective: Compare the temporomandibular pain and the mandibular movements before and after of the orthognathic surgery in the sagital mandibular surgery fixed with orthognathic plate from modus system of Medartis versus bicortical fixation. Method and patients: Retrospective study in 42 patients from «Juan I. Menchaca» Hospital between two group’s evaluation before and after the surgery. Results: In the preoperatory of group A 1 patient had pain and 3 articular noises and the 6 months from post operatory the pain increased in 2 patients and 1 with articular noise. In the group B the pain and the articular noises were down and the maximum open mouths in the group A no significative changes. Conclusion: The use of orthognathic plate from Modus system (Medartis) improve the adaptation of condyle in the glenoidea fosse, less pain and less articular noises.


REFERENCES

  1. Salyer KE, Haisong Xu, Portnof JE, Yamada A, Chong DK, Genecov ER. Skeletal facial balance and harmony in the cleft patient: Principles and techniques in orthognathic surgery. Indian J Plast Surg 2009; Suppl. 1: 42.

  2. Shabid R, Aziz, Simon P. Hullihen and the origin of orthognathic surgery. J. Oral Maxillofac Surg 2004; 62: 1303-1307.

  3. Martos DP, González GR, Naval GL, Aguirre-Jaime A, Sastre PJ. Mancha de la Plata María, Villa Navarro Esther. Time used for orthodontic surgical treatment of dentofacial deformities in White patients. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2010; 68: 88-92.

  4. Koichiro U, Kohei M, Kiyomasa N, Etsubide Y. Condylar and temporomandibular joint disc position after mandibular osteotomy for prognathism. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2002; 60: 1424-1432.

  5. Delgado GB, Aguirre ECT, Salazar PL. Medios de fijación en cirugía ortognática. Ed Rev Med IMSS 2004; 43 (3): 259-262.

  6. Emshoff R, Scheiderbauer A, Gerhard S, Norer B. Stability after rigid fixation of simultaneous maxillary impaction and mandibular advancement osteotomies. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2003; 32: 137-142.

  7. Molina MJL, Téllez RJ. Osteotomía sagital bilateral de rama mandibular (Alternativa «momo» en el manejo fácil de la osteotomía sagital bilateral de rama mandibular). Rev Mexicana de Cirugía Oral y Maxilofacial 2009; 5 (2): 52-59.

  8. Cheng-Jen C, Bhushan B, Schwartz-Dabney C, Sinn DP. Mechanical characteristics of the mandible after bilateral sagittal split ramus osteotomy: comparing 2 different fixation techniques. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2005; 63: 68-76.

  9. Essick GK, Kim SHP, Zuniga J. Sensory retraining following orthognathic surgery: effect on threshold measures of sensory function. Journal of Oral Rehabilitation 2009; 36 (6): 415-426.

  10. Domingos PR, Magro-Filho O, Shastri KA, Papageorge MB. In vitro biomechanical evaluation of the use of conventional and locking miniplate/screw systems for sagittal split ramus osteotomy. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2010; 68: 724-730.

  11. Myoung Geun Kang, Kyoung in Yun, Chang Hyun Kim and Je-Uk Park. Postoperative condylar position by Sagital ramus osteotomy with and without bone graft. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2010; 68: 2058-2064.

  12. Jesper O, Jensen J, Melsen B. Factors of importance for the functional outcome in orthognathic surgery patients: A prospective study of 118 patients. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2010; 68: 2221-2231.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com