Aim: This study was performed to evaluate the movement of the proximal segment following different methods of ramus osteotomy that is one of the side effects of orthognathic surgery. Theoretically, with intraoral vert...Aim: This study was performed to evaluate the movement of the proximal segment following different methods of ramus osteotomy that is one of the side effects of orthognathic surgery. Theoretically, with intraoral verticosagittal ramus osteotomy, it can minimize the movement of the proximal segment. The changes in the intergonal distance of mandible and the angle of the ramus flaring in two methods of osteotomy have been compared in this study. Materials and Methods: In this randomized clinical trial, included 60 patients (32 males) with mandibular prognathism and without any asymmetry were selected and divided into two groups (n = 30). One group underwent bilateral sagittal split ramus osteotomy technique to achieve mandibular setback and the other by the intraoral verticosagittal ramus osteotomy technique. Intergonial width and inner-ramal angle in the transverse plane were measured on radiographs preoperatively and 1 and 12 weeks postoperatively. Data were analyzed using covariance test with the significance level set at P 0.1). Conclusion: Considering our findings, there was no significant difference between two ramus osteotomy techniques regarding changes in mandibular width and inter-ramal flaring angle.展开更多
文摘Aim: This study was performed to evaluate the movement of the proximal segment following different methods of ramus osteotomy that is one of the side effects of orthognathic surgery. Theoretically, with intraoral verticosagittal ramus osteotomy, it can minimize the movement of the proximal segment. The changes in the intergonal distance of mandible and the angle of the ramus flaring in two methods of osteotomy have been compared in this study. Materials and Methods: In this randomized clinical trial, included 60 patients (32 males) with mandibular prognathism and without any asymmetry were selected and divided into two groups (n = 30). One group underwent bilateral sagittal split ramus osteotomy technique to achieve mandibular setback and the other by the intraoral verticosagittal ramus osteotomy technique. Intergonial width and inner-ramal angle in the transverse plane were measured on radiographs preoperatively and 1 and 12 weeks postoperatively. Data were analyzed using covariance test with the significance level set at P 0.1). Conclusion: Considering our findings, there was no significant difference between two ramus osteotomy techniques regarding changes in mandibular width and inter-ramal flaring angle.
