[Contrast analysis of different sagittal split ramus osteotomy methods in correcting mandibular prognathism]

Area of Science:

• Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery
• Orthognathic Surgery
• Skeletal Reconstruction

Background:

• Mandibular prognathism correction often involves intraoral sagittal split ramus osteotomy (SSRO).
• Both classical and modified SSRO techniques are utilized for treating mandibular deformities.
• Evaluating the comparative efficacy and complication rates of these techniques is crucial for surgical decision-making.

Observation:

• A study compared modified SSRO (43 patients) with classical SSRO (52 patients) for mandibular prognathism over 8 years.
• Patients presented with various deformities including mandibular prognathism, deviation, maxillary retrognathism, glossacele, and malar protrusion.
• Pre- and post-operative cephalometric analysis (SNA, SNB, ANB) assessed skeletal changes.

Findings:

• Both techniques significantly improved facial aesthetics and dental occlusion.
• Classical SSRO resulted in higher rates of sensory disturbance (9/52), mandibular fracture (1/52), bleeding (1/52), infection (1/52), and relapse (3/52).
• Modified SSRO demonstrated a lower incidence of sensory disturbance (2/43) and relapse (1/43), with no fractures, significant bleeding, or infections.

Implications:

• Modified SSRO appears to be a safer and more advantageous technique for correcting mandibular prognathism.
• The modified approach is particularly recommended for severe cases, including those with mandibular deviation.
• These findings support the adoption of modified SSRO for improved patient outcomes in orthognathic surgery.