Abstract

In this study we compared the aesthetic outcome of (1) Le Fort I (LFI) osteotomy and (2) intraoral quadrangular Le Fort II (IQLFII) osteotomy for surgical correction of skeletal class III dysgnathia involving midfacial deficiency. The aim was to investigate whether laypersons see differences in facial changes that occur due to variations of the osteotomy cuts. The patient collectives consisted of 23 patients in each group. Pre- and postoperative photographs were presented in a random sequence to 40 layperson raters. The rating procedure was conducted with a four-point Likert scale. Assessed characteristics were ‘attractiveness’ (‘Attraktivität’), ‘likeability’ (‘Sympathie’), ‘intelligence’ (‘Intelligenz’), ‘aggressiveness’ (‘Aggressivität’) and ‘dominance’ (‘Dominanz’). For preoperative photographs we found a significant difference for ‘likeability’ with lower ratings for the IQLFII group; all other criteria were rated similarly. For the IQLFII group we found a significantly larger shift from lower to higher ratings for ‘attractiveness’ and ‘likeability’ and a significantly larger shift from higher to lower ratings for ‘aggressiveness’ and ‘dominance’ than for the LF I group. Our study shows that lay raters detect significant differences between the two surgical groups. Thus, IQLFII osteotomy, when indicated, represents a favourable alternative to conventional LFI osteotomy, if patients desire the expectable change in recognition by their social circle.

Highlights

  • Besides conventional Le Fort I (LFI) osteotomy, which is frequently regarded as the gold standard procedure for maxillary movements in bimaxillary surgery, intraoral quadrangular Le Fort II (IQLFII) osteotomy can be conducted in cases of severe infraorbital deficits[5]

  • The comparison group, 23 LFI patients, was acquired as follows: (1) the clinic archive was searched for all class III dysgnathia patients, (2) preoperative photo documentation was previewed for the presence of midfacial deficiency and (3) patients who were considered in retrospect to have been eligible to receive IQLFII but received LFI osteotomy instead were selected and matched

  • In the multivariable regression model, the effects of surgery (P < 0.0001), patients’ gender (P = 0.045) as well as raters’ age (P = 0.002) and education (P < 0.0001) remained significant. This is the first study evaluating the aesthetic outcome of a patient collective with midfacial deficiency that was treated by IQLFII surgery

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Klug: Evaluation of facial aesthetics by laypersons in patients undergoing intraoral quadrangular Le Fort II osteotomy compared with conventional Le Fort I osteotomy. In this study we compared the aesthetic outcome of (1) Le Fort I (LFI) osteotomy and (2) intraoral quadrangular Le Fort II (IQLFII) osteotomy for surgical correction of skeletal class III dysgnathia involving midfacial deficiency. For preoperative photographs we found a significant difference for ‘likeability’ with lower ratings for the IQLFII group; all other criteria were rated . Besides conventional Le Fort I (LFI) osteotomy, which is frequently regarded as the gold standard procedure for maxillary movements in bimaxillary surgery, intraoral quadrangular Le Fort II (IQLFII) osteotomy can be conducted in cases of severe infraorbital deficits[5]. Based on data of previous studies, it could be suggested that the projection of deficient midfaces and cheek lines becomes more obvious when the infraorbital rim is included in the advancement procedure compared with mere advancement at the LFI level[5,7]

Objectives
Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call