Orthognathic Surgery Workup

  • Author: Pravin K Patel, MD; Chief Editor: Jorge I de la Torre, MD, FACS   more...
 
Updated: Feb 1, 2012
 

Imaging Studies

Clinical photographs are essential for documentation and to allow for photometric analysis. Use soft-tissue landmarks to obtain angular and linear measurements that can help define the problem quantitatively. Standardize frontal and profile photographs. A clear acetate ruler can be placed next to the patient when the photographs are obtained for reference measurement for magnification; otherwise, a proportionate-type analysis without reliance on absolute values can be used. Images with the lips at repose and during animation (smiling) are obtained; the degree of dental display is noted for each.

Skeletal evaluation typically includes radiographic evaluation with ortho–Panorex and cephalometric x-rays.

  • Ortho–Panorex x-rays provide an overview of the stage of dental development, the mandibular anatomy, and gross pathology. Specific films such as occlusal and periapical views can be obtained to further assess the dentition, supporting bone, and interdental spaces.
  • Cephalometric x-rays provide for standardized skull and/or facial views that allow for comparison over time to assess growth in an individual and for comparison of that individual against standardized population norms.
    • Skeletal views can be obtained in lateral and frontal views.
    • Lateral cephalometric x-ray allows for assessment of the elements of the dentofacial skeleton from a sagittal perspective. See the image below. Analysis of the dentofacial skeleton is based on iAnalysis of the dentofacial skeleton is based on identifiable radiographic landmarks on a lateral cephalometric x-ray.
    • With lateral cephalometric x-ray, the maxilla can be related to the mandible and each related to their position in the skull base. Simultaneously, the soft-tissue profile can be related to the facial skeleton. See the image below. Lateral cephalometric analysis of the facial skeleLateral cephalometric analysis of the facial skeleton based on Steiner analysis. The positions of the maxilla and mandible each are related spatially to the anterior cranial base and to each other. Note that normative values of the facial elements depend on a normal anterior cranial base inclination and length, which typically are altered in craniofacial conditions.
    • Lateral cephalometric x-ray also allows the dentition to be related to each other, and each can be related to its own skeletal base, the maxilla, and the mandible. See the image below. Lateral cephalometric analysis of the dentition wiLateral cephalometric analysis of the dentition within the skeletal framework.
    • Frontal cephalometric x-ray allows for assessment of the degree of facial asymmetry.
    • Obtain quantitative measurements based on key anatomic landmarks (cephalometric analysis). Numerous cephalometric analyses exist, each emphasizing particular skeletal and dental elements. Common analyses include Steiner, Ricketts, and Delaire and are beyond the scope of this overview. For the surgeon, the analysis must be clinically workable, simple to use, and directly relatable to the skeletal elements that can be repositioned. While the analysis is invaluable, do not focus the treatment plan solely on correcting cephalometric abnormalities.

Additional radiographs include the following:

  • Periapical films are obtained to determine if sufficient space exists for interdental osteotomies.
  • On occasion, hand wrist films are useful to help determine skeletal age based on the known timing of sequential closure of the epiphyseal growth plates. However, typically facial skeletal maturity is determined by comparison of serial lateral cephalometric films obtained at 6-month intervals.
  • Three-dimensional computerized tomography (3DCT) is increasingly being used for surgical evaluation and planning in academic settings. Preoperative planning using 3DCT offers multiple potential advantages, including the ability to easily consider multiple different surgical approaches to a problem and the ability to characterize degree and direction of skeletal movement at any point over the osteotomized segment (as opposed to only the occlusal level). With advancing technology, such 3D visualization of the patient's anatomic deformity is likely to replace today's conventional 2D cephalometric analysis.
  • In cleft orthognathic surgery, plain film radiographs (occlusal and periapical) and CT are helpful in preoperatively determining the adequacy of bone across a previously bone-grafted alveolar cleft.
Next

Other Tests

Dental models

  • Surgical movement of maxilla and mandible inherently alter the maxillary-mandibular dental occlusion, and as such, careful analysis of the dental models with the orthodontist is essential. The maxillary dental and mandibular dental casts can be studied individually and hand manipulated with each other to assess how the arches are coordinated.
  • Assessment of the models includes space analysis and arch length, transverse width discrepancies, position of the individual tooth within its own arch, and the relationship of the maxillary dentition to the mandibular dentition.
  • Establish the diagnosis from a working problem list generated from the clinical and photographic evaluation, cephalometric analysis, and study dental models.
Previous
 
 
Contributor Information and Disclosures
Author

Pravin K Patel, MD  Associate Professor of Surgery, Division of Plastic Surgery, Northwestern University, The Feinberg School of Medicine; Chief of Plastic and Craniofacial Surgery, Shriner's Hospitals for Children; Head of Craniofacial Surgery, Children's Memorial Hospital

Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Coauthor(s)

Andrew Gassman, MD  Resident Physician, Department of General Surgery, Loyola University Medical Center

Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

David E Morris, MD  Assistant Professor of Surgery, Division of Plastic, Reconstructive, and Cosmetic Surgery, University of Illinois at Chicago College of Medicine; Staff Surgeon, Shriner's Hospital for Children

David E Morris, MD is a member of the following medical societies: Chicago Medical Society and Illinois State Medical Society

Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Linping Zhao, PhD  Research Specialist and Craniofacial Fellow, Shriners Hospitals for Children, Chicago; Visiting Research Specialist in Biomedical Engineering, Department of Surgery, University of Illinois at Chicago; Adjunct Assistant Professor, Bioengineering Department, University of Illinois at Chicago; Adjunt Assistant Professor, Biomedical Department, Marquette University

Linping Zhao, PhD is a member of the following medical societies: American Cleft Palate/Craniofacial Association and American Society of Mechanical Engineers

Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Specialty Editor Board

John Arthur Persing  MD, Chief and Professor, Department of Surgery, Sections of Plastic Surgery and Neurosurgery, Yale University School of Medicine

John Arthur Persing is a member of the following medical societies: American Academy of Pediatrics, American Association of Neurological Surgeons, American Association of Plastic Surgeons, American Cleft Palate/Craniofacial Association, American College of Surgeons, American Medical Association, American Society of Maxillofacial Surgeons, New York Academy of Sciences, and Society for Neuroscience

Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Francisco Talavera, PharmD, PhD  Adjunct Assistant Professor, University of Nebraska Medical Center College of Pharmacy; Editor-in-Chief, Medscape Drug Reference

Disclosure: Medscape Salary Employment

R Edward Newsome, MD†  Former Program Director and Chief of Plastic Surgery, Henderson Chair in Surgery, Former Assistant Dean for Graduate Medical Education, Tulane University School of Medicine

R Edward Newsome, MD† is a member of the following medical societies: American College of Surgeons, American Medical Association, American Society of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, American Society of Plastic Surgeons, and Louisiana State Medical Society

Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Nicolas (Nick) G Slenkovich, MD  Director, Colorado Plastic Surgery Center

Nicolas (Nick) G Slenkovich, MD is a member of the following medical societies: American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, American College of Surgeons, American Medical Association, American Society of Aesthetic Plastic Surgery, American Society of Plastic Surgeons, and Colorado Medical Society

Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Chief Editor

Jorge I de la Torre, MD, FACS  Professor of Surgery and Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Chief, Division of Plastic Surgery, Residency Program Director, University of Alabama at Birmingham School of Medicine; Director, Center for Advanced Surgical Aesthetics

Jorge I de la Torre, MD, FACS is a member of the following medical societies: American Association of Plastic Surgeons, American Burn Association, American College of Surgeons, American Medical Association, American Society for Laser Medicine and Surgery, American Society for Reconstructive Microsurgery, American Society of Maxillofacial Surgeons, American Society of Plastic Surgeons, Association for Academic Surgery, and Medical Association of the State of Alabama

Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Additional Contributors

The authors are grateful for the many years of generous support provided by Shriners Hospitals for Children in caring for children with facial skeletal deformities.

References
  1. Trauner R, Obwegeser H. The surgical correction of mandibular prognathism and retrognathia with consideration of genioplasty. I. Surgical procedures to correct mandibular prognathism and reshaping of the chin. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. Jul 1957;10(7):677-89; contd. [Medline].

  2. Angle EH. Classification of Malocclusion. Dental Cosmos. 1899;41(3).

  3. Vijayalakshmi PS, Veereshi AS. Management of severe class II malocclusion with fixed functional appliance: Forsus. J Contemp Dent Pract. May 1 2011;12(3):216-20. [Medline].

  4. Wen-Ching Ko E, Huang CS, Lo LJ, Chen YR. Longitudinal Observation of Mandibular Motion Pattern in Patients With Skeletal Class III Malocclusion Subsequent to Orthognathic Surgery. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. Feb 2012;70(2):e158-68. [Medline].

  5. Posnick JC, Ricalde P. Cleft-orthognathic surgery. Clin Plast Surg. Apr 2004;31(2):315-30. [Medline].

  6. Deshpande SN, Munoli AV. Osseous genioplasty: A case series. Indian J Plast Surg. Sep 2011;44(3):414-21. [Medline]. [Full Text].

  7. Bell WH. Modern Practice in Orthognathic and Reconstructive Surgery. Philadelphia, Pa: WB Saunders Co; 1992.

  8. Booth PW, Schendel SA, Hausamen JE. Maxillofacial Surgery. London: Churchill Livingstone; 1999.

  9. Patel PK. Clinics in Plastic Surgery: Orthognathic Surgery. 34. Philadelphia, Pa: Elsevier; 2007:[Full Text].

  10. Epker BN, Stella JP, Fish LC. Dentofacial Deformities: Integrated Orthodontic & Surgical Correction. Chicago, Ill: Year Book Medical Pub; 1998.

  11. Eppley BL, Pietrzak WS, Blanton MW. Allograft and alloplastic bone substitutes: a review of science and technology for the craniomaxillofacial surgeon. J Craniofac Surg. Nov 2005;16(6):981-9. [Medline].

  12. Ferraro JW. Fundamentals of Maxillofacial Surgery. New York: Springer-Verlag; 1997.

  13. Fonseca RJ, ed. Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery. Philadelphia, Pa: WB Saunders; 2000.

  14. Graber TM, Vanarsdall RL. Orthodontics: Current Principles and Techniques. Chicago, Ill: Year Book Medical Pub; 2000.

  15. Kaban LB, Pogrel MA, Perrott DH. Complications in Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery. Philadelphia, Pa: WB Saunders Company; 1997.

  16. Posnick JC. Craniofacial and Maxillofacial Surgery in Children and Young Adults. Philadelphia, Pa: WB Saunders Company; 2000.

  17. Proffit WR, White Jr RP, Sarver DM. Contemporary Treatment of Dentofacial Deformities. St. Louis, Mo: CV Mosby; 2002.

  18. Wolfe SA, Berkowitz S. Plastic Surgery of the Facial Skeleton. Boston, Mass: Little, Brown and Company; 1989.

Previous
Next
 
Ideal facial proportions believed to be in aesthetic balance. Such proportions are only guidelines, as ideal proportions change over time, and the ideal result varies with patient expectations.
Profile analysis illustrating the degree of facial convexity or concavity from an acceptable orthognathic norm.
An overview of the clinical, radiographic, and dental evaluation used in planning orthognathic surgery.
Analysis of the dentofacial skeleton is based on identifiable radiographic landmarks on a lateral cephalometric x-ray.
Lateral cephalometric analysis of the facial skeleton based on Steiner analysis. The positions of the maxilla and mandible each are related spatially to the anterior cranial base and to each other. Note that normative values of the facial elements depend on a normal anterior cranial base inclination and length, which typically are altered in craniofacial conditions.
Lateral cephalometric analysis of the dentition within the skeletal framework.
Illustration of 2-dimensional (2D) versus 3-dimensional (3D) planning for orthognathic surgery. All images are of the same patient (with maxillary deficiency and mandibular prognathism). Unlike conventional 2D cephalometric analysis and treatment planning, 3DCT-based analysis provides a more accurate simulation of the surgery and affords analysis in all 3 planes. Note that in the upper images, the osteotomies have been made (left) and then the maxillary and mandibular segments have been moved (right).
Illustration of the role of presurgical dental decompensation in a patient requiring mandibular advancement. Dental decompensation is necessary to allow for proper degree of mandibular advancement and for postsurgical stability at the occlusal level. Note that the occlusion is made worse until corrected by skeletal advancement.
Presurgical orthodontic management requires appropriate dental decompensation, alignment of the dentition within the individual arches, leveling of the curve of Spee, and coordination of the maxillary and mandibular dentition for postoperative stability.
Illustration of the transverse maxillary Le Fort I osteotomy. The osteotomy is made with a reciprocating saw and completed at the pterygopalatine junction with a curved osteotome.
Variation of midfacial osteotomies to correct differing degrees of midfacial deformities involving the zygoma.
Illustration of the sagittal split ramal osteotomy. Place the horizontal osteotomy superior to the inferior alveolar nerve foramen and continue partially through the body along the oblique line to the region of the second and first molar to complete the vertical osteotomy. Make the osteotomy through the cortex with a reciprocating saw and complete it with an osteotome along the buccal surface.
Illustration of mandibular excess. The patient underwent bilateral sagittal split ramal osteotomy and mandibular setback.
Illustration of mandibular deficiency. The patient underwent bilateral sagittal split ramal osteotomy and advancement.
Illustration of maxillary deficiency with relative mandibular excess. The patient underwent a modified Le Fort I midfacial advancement that included the body of the zygoma.
Illustration of vertical maxillary excess, apertognathia, and mandibular retrognathia. The patient underwent Le Fort I anterior-posterior differential maxillary impaction with sagittal split ramal osteotomy and mandibular advancement.
Table. Typical Presentation of Maxillofacial Deformities
Deformity Clinical Features Skeletal Assessment Dental Assessment
Maxilla: Sagittal deficiencyConcave facial profile



Retrusive upper lip



Acute nasolabial angle



Alar base narrow



Lack of dental display



SNA* decreased



SNB† normal



ANB‡ decreased



Class III



Maxillary dental crowding



Maxillary incisors proclined



Mandibular incisors normal or retroclined



Maxilla: Sagittal excessConvex facial profile



Obtuse nasolabial angle



SNA increased



SNB normal



ANB increased



--
Maxilla: Vertical excess (long face syndrome)Convex profile



Lower facial height increased



Alar base constricted



Nasolabial angle obtuse



Excessive incisor show



Excessive gingival show



Lip incompetence



Mentalis strain with lip closure



Chin vertically long, retruded



Lower FH§ increased



SNA decreased



SNB decreased



ANB increased



Mandibular plane angle steep



Palatal-occlusal plane increased



Class II, Class I



Anterior open bite



Maxillary arch constricted



Curve of Spee, flat-accentuated



Dental crowding



Maxilla: Vertical deficiency (short face syndrome)Concave facial profile



Lower facial height decreased



Acute nasolabial angle



Alar base widened



Lack of incisor show



Edentulous appearance



Chin protruded



Lower FH decreased



SNB increased



ANB negative



Palatal-occlusal plane decreased



Mandibular plane angle acute



Class II, Class I



Deep bite



Crowding



Mandibular dentition



Curve of Spee reverse



Mandible: DeficiencyConvex profile



Retruded chin



Everted lower lip



Deep labiomental crease



Mentalis strain with lip closure



SNA normal



SNB decreased



ANB increased



Ar-Gn¶ decreased



Class II



Mandibular incisors proclined



Maxillary incisors retroclined



Curve of Spee accentuated



Mandible: ExcessConcave profile



Midface appears deficient



Lower third broad



Lower lip thin



SNA normal



SNB decreased



ANB decreased



Class II



Maxillary incisors proclined



Mandibular incisors retroclined



Previous
Next
 
 
 
 
 
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2012 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

DISCLAIMER: The content of this Website is not influenced by sponsors. The site is designed primarily for use by qualified physicians and other medical professionals. The information contained herein should NOT be used as a substitute for the advice of an appropriately qualified and licensed physician or other health care provider. The information provided here is for educational and informational purposes only. In no way should it be considered as offering medical advice. Please check with a physician if you suspect you are ill.