Clear Aligner Orthognathic Splints (CAOS) and Custom Maxillary Fixation Plates for Surgery-First or Surgery-Only Cases

Comparative Assessment of Orthodontic and Aesthetic Outcomes after Orthognathic Surgery with Clear Aligner or Fixed Appliance Therapy

BACKGROUND

Clear aligner therapy has an aesthetic advantage over fixed appliance therapy. However, to our knowledge, no study has objectively compared patient orthodontic and aesthetic outcomes between clear aligner and fixed appliance therapies administered after orthognathic surgery (OGS).

METHODS

This study included patients with no history of congenital craniofacial deformities who underwent surgery-first OGS and received clear aligner or fixed appliance therapy. The patients' grades on the Dental Health Component (DHC) and Aesthetic Component of the Index of Orthodontic Treatment Need and scores on the Peer Assessment Rating (PAR) index were calculated before OGS (T0), after OGS (T1), and after orthodontic therapy (T2).

RESULTS

This study included 33 patients (clear aligner therapy, n = 19; fixed appliance therapy, n = 14). No considerable between-group differences were noted in the DHC and AC grades at T0, T1, or T2. Furthermore, percentage of reduction in the PAR index score was more significant in the clear aligner group (74.4%) than in the fixed appliance group (63.2%) from T0 to T1 ( P = 0.035); however, no between-group differences were noted from T1 to T2 or from T0 to T2. Both groups exhibited substantially improved DHC grades, Aesthetic Component grades, and PAR index scores at T1 and T2.

CONCLUSIONS

Patient outcomes were similar between the clear aligner and fixed appliance groups after orthodontic therapy. However, the former group exhibited more favorable immediate results after OGS than did the latter group. Thus, as an adjunct therapy for patients with malocclusion, clear aligner therapy may be more effective than fixed appliance therapy.

CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic, II.

Customized palatal guide and splint for maxillary expansion

Customization in orthognathic surgery allows better precision and a reduced surgical time. In Le Fort I osteotomy surgery, the maxillary segmentation is considered one of the most unstable procedures due to transverse instability. Various different types of palatal device have been proposed to address this instability. This note describes a customized bone-borne palatal guide and splint that may help surgeons shorten the surgical time and achieve better three-dimensional repositioning, with more postoperative comfort for the patient and occlusal control for the surgeon.

Current Trends in Orthognathic Surgery

Orthognathic surgery has evolved significantly over the past century. Osteotomies of the midface and mandible are contemporaneously used to perform independent or coordinated movements to address functional and aesthetic problems. Specific advances in the past twenty years include increasing fidelity with computer-assisted planning, the use of patient-specific fixation, expanding indications for management of upper airway obstruction, and shifts in orthodontic-surgical paradigms. This review article serves to highlight the contemporary practice of orthognathic surgery.