A Revision Mandibuloplasty: Causes, Indications, Surgical Methods and Treatment Outcomes

This paper aims to propose a classification system to categorize patients undergoing revision mandibuloplasty according to their dissatisfaction types. This paper also introduces various appropriate revision techniques and evaluates their outcomes. Through this classification system and suggested surgical techniques, surgeons can settle the disappointments experienced by patients after their primary mandibuloplasty, by realizing more natural-looking results.

The study subjects consisted of 184 patients who underwent a revision mandibuloplasty from October 2010 to March 2016, conducted by a single surgeon at a single institution. The authors were able to classify the dissatisfaction into two primary types-(1) lack of an overall slender frontal facial contour and (2) unnatural and asymmetrical overall facial appearance due to over- or inaccurate resection of the bone. A self-evaluation of patient's subjective satisfaction based on the scale from 1 to 5, both after the primary operation and after revision surgery, was compared.

Dissatisfaction type I accounted for 145 patients (78.8 percent). The number of patients classified into dissatisfaction type II was 39 (21.2 percent). Of the patients categorized into type I, those undergoing revision surgeries due to an under-corrected mandibular tubercle and parasymphysis showed the most remarkable improvement in self-satisfaction score after reoperation-from 2.3 to 4.0.

To realize a natural-looking outcome in facial look through mandibular contouring, it is important not only to carefully consider the ratio and shape essential for an optimal slender facial contour, but also to minimize unnecessary resection of the bone.

This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .