Which kind of frontal mandibulotomy is the smartest? A biomechanical study. Issue 2 (March 2015)
- Record Type:
- Journal Article
- Title:
- Which kind of frontal mandibulotomy is the smartest? A biomechanical study. Issue 2 (March 2015)
- Main Title:
- Which kind of frontal mandibulotomy is the smartest? A biomechanical study
- Authors:
- Steiner, T.
Raith, S.
Scherer, E.
Mücke, T.
Torsiglieri, T.
Rohleder, N.H.
Eder, M.
Grohmann, I.
Kesting, M.
Bier, H.
Wolff, K.-D.
Hölzle, F. - Abstract:
- <abstract xml:lang="en" abstract-type="author" id="abs0010"> <title id="sectitle0010">Abstract</title> <sec> <title id="sectitle0015">Purpose</title> <p id="abspara0010">Retrospective clinical evaluation and biomechanical tests were performed to compare the primary stability and the rate of pseudarthrosis formation after irradiation for two types of mandibular split osteotomies: the stairstep osteotomy (SSO) and the straight-line osteotomy (SLO).</p> </sec> <sec> <title id="sectitle0020">Methods</title> <p id="abspara0015">The postoperative occurrence of pseudarthrosis was retrospectively analysed in 46 non-consecutive clinical cases of SSO and SLO between 2003 and 2013.</p> <p id="abspara0020">Biomechanical tests were performed on 12 standardised synthetic mandibles (Synbone) to compare the SSO and SLO approaches. Two 2.0 mm monocortical miniplates (Medartis) were used for osteosynthesis. The artificial mandible specimens were loaded to 300 N on the Mandibulator test bench while interfragmentary motion was measured using the PONTOS optical measurement device.</p> </sec> <sec> <title id="sectitle0025">Results</title> <p id="abspara0025">The retrospective clinical analysis showed a rate of pseudarthrosis of 19% in the SLO group versus only 5% in the SSO group (<italic>p</italic> = 0.17).</p> <p id="abspara0030">In the biomechanical investigation, the average interfragmentary movement was 14.3 ± 7.70 for the SLO group and 4.57 ± 2.33 for the SSO group under a maximum load of<abstract xml:lang="en" abstract-type="author" id="abs0010"> <title id="sectitle0010">Abstract</title> <sec> <title id="sectitle0015">Purpose</title> <p id="abspara0010">Retrospective clinical evaluation and biomechanical tests were performed to compare the primary stability and the rate of pseudarthrosis formation after irradiation for two types of mandibular split osteotomies: the stairstep osteotomy (SSO) and the straight-line osteotomy (SLO).</p> </sec> <sec> <title id="sectitle0020">Methods</title> <p id="abspara0015">The postoperative occurrence of pseudarthrosis was retrospectively analysed in 46 non-consecutive clinical cases of SSO and SLO between 2003 and 2013.</p> <p id="abspara0020">Biomechanical tests were performed on 12 standardised synthetic mandibles (Synbone) to compare the SSO and SLO approaches. Two 2.0 mm monocortical miniplates (Medartis) were used for osteosynthesis. The artificial mandible specimens were loaded to 300 N on the Mandibulator test bench while interfragmentary motion was measured using the PONTOS optical measurement device.</p> </sec> <sec> <title id="sectitle0025">Results</title> <p id="abspara0025">The retrospective clinical analysis showed a rate of pseudarthrosis of 19% in the SLO group versus only 5% in the SSO group (<italic>p</italic> = 0.17).</p> <p id="abspara0030">In the biomechanical investigation, the average interfragmentary movement was 14.3 ± 7.70 for the SLO group and 4.57 ± 2.33 for the SSO group under a maximum load of 300 N, resulting in a statistically significant difference between the two approaches (<italic>p</italic> = 0.014).</p> </sec> <sec> <title id="sectitle0030">Conclusion</title> <p id="abspara0035">To minimise the rate of postoperative pseudarthrosis formation, SSO is superior to SLO for mandibular split procedures, because SSO provides greater resistance to vertical loads and allows less interfragmentary movement.</p> </sec> <sec> <title id="sectitle0035">Level of evidence</title> <p id="abspara0040">2C (Outcomes research).</p> </sec> </abstract> … (more)
- Is Part Of:
- Journal of cranio-maxillofacial surgery. Volume 43:Issue 2(2015:Mar.)
- Journal:
- Journal of cranio-maxillofacial surgery
- Issue:
- Volume 43:Issue 2(2015:Mar.)
- Issue Display:
- Volume 43, Issue 2 (2015)
- Year:
- 2015
- Volume:
- 43
- Issue:
- 2
- Issue Sort Value:
- 2015-0043-0002-0000
- Page Start:
- 199
- Page End:
- 203
- Publication Date:
- 2015-03
- Subjects:
- Skull -- Surgery -- Periodicals
Maxilla -- Surgery -- Periodicals
Face -- Surgery -- Periodicals
Surgery, Plastic -- Periodicals
Maxilla -- surgery -- Periodicals
Face -- surgery -- Periodicals
Skull -- surgery -- Periodicals
Oral Surgical Procedures -- Periodicals
Reconstructive Surgical Procedures -- Periodicals
Surgery, Plastic -- Periodicals
Surgery, Oral -- Periodicals
Electronic journals
617.514 - Journal URLs:
- http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/10105182 ↗
http://firstsearch.oclc.org ↗
http://www.clinicalkey.com/dura/browse/journalIssue/10105182 ↗
http://www.elsevier.com/journals ↗ - DOI:
- 10.1016/j.jcms.2014.11.004 ↗
- Languages:
- English
- ISSNs:
- 1010-5182
- Deposit Type:
- Legaldeposit
- View Content:
- Available online (eLD content is only available in our Reading Rooms) ↗
- Physical Locations:
- British Library DSC - 4965.482000
British Library DSC - BLDSS-3PM
British Library HMNTS - ELD Digital store - Ingest File:
- 3119.xml