One-splint versus two-splint technique in orthognathic surgery for class III asymmetry: comparison of patient-centred outcomes

Abstract

ObjectivesTwo-jaw orthognathic surgery (OGS) is done using either the one-splint technique with free-hand positioning of the maxillomandibular complex or the two-splint technique with intermediate splints to position the maxilla. It is uncertain which technique achieves better outcomes. This study compares frontal soft tissue symmetry and subjective patient QoL between one-splint and two-splint techniques in skeletal Class III asymmetry patients undergoing OGS with three-dimensional surgical planning.Materials and methodsThis retrospective case-control study comprised 34 one-splint and 46 two-splint OGS patients. Frontal photographs and Orthognathic Quality of Life Questionnaire (OQLQ) were done pre- and post-treatment. Frontal soft tissue symmetry was analysed with the anthropometric Facial Symmetry Index. Measurements were compared with t-tests and chi-squared tests with p-value set at 0.05.ResultsThe groups differed in pre-treatment ANB and OQLQ scores. The two-splint group showed significant improvement in all symmetry measures. The one-splint group showed significant improvement in all symmetry measures except midface deviation, upper contour deviation and the Facial Contour Symmetry Index. Both groups showed significant improvement in OQLQ scores. There were no significant differences in post-treatment symmetry measurements and OQLQ scores between groups.ConclusionsAlthough two-splint technique may better improve contour symmetry, there were no significant differences in frontal soft tissue symmetry and QoL after OGS in skeletal Class III asymmetry with either one-splint or two-splint technique, with both techniques resulting in significant improvement.Clinical relevanceOne-splint and two-splint surgical techniques produce similar patient-centred outcomes in Class III asymmetry patients.