Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 3, 2026

A Postoperative Evaluation Guideline for Computer-Assisted Reconstruction of the Mandible
Published on: January 28, 2020
Accuracy of maxillary repositioning in two-jaw surgery with conventional articulator model surgery versus virtual
T-G Kwon1, J-W Choi1, H-M Kyung2
1Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, School of Dentistry, Kyungpook National University, Daegu, Republic of Korea.
Abstract:
The purpose of this study was to compare the accuracy of maxillary repositioning using the recently introduced computerized virtual model surgery (VMS) with conventional articulator model surgery (AMS). Forty-two patients who had undergone bimaxillary surgery were investigated retrospectively in this study. The patients were divided into two groups: conventional AMS (n = 23) and VMS (n = 19) for intermediate splint fabrication in maxillary positioning. Planned surgical movements and actual postsurgical changes of the lateral and frontal cephalometric measurements were compared. Although variations from the planned surgical movements were relatively small, both methods had statistically significant errors in some of the linear measurements. Both groups had a similar range of errors. The overall absolute mean discrepancy between the planned and actual surgical movements for the linear measurements was 1.17 mm (0-3.6 mm) in AMS and 0.95 mm (0-3.2 mm) in VMS. Of the total measurements, measurements reflecting a surgical discrepancy of more than 2 mm or 2° comprised 12.0% of the cases in AMS and 7.9% in VMS. The surgical accuracy of maxillary positioning with VMS was comparable to conventional AMS. Because VMS has the definitive advantage of eliminating the complex laboratory step and shortening the laboratory time, this can be accepted as an alternative to AMS.

