[Surgery First : prediction for skeletal objectives through structural analysis. Comparison of Sassouni and Delaire analysis]

Evaluation of orthodontists' experience with the surgery first protocol in orthodontic-surgical management

AIM OF THE STUDY

The aim of this study was to analyze the popularity of surgery first among orthodontists as well as the protocols used for its implementation and to collect the opinions (favorable or unfavorable) of practitioners and patients regarding it.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A questionnaire was sent to a population of dental surgeons qualified in Dentofacial Orthopedics or in the process of specialization (residents) practicing in France. The questionnaire consisted of a total of 27 questions. There were 10 open-ended questions and 17 closed-ended questions (8 binary and 9 multiple choices). The conditional pathway allows the respondent's path through the form to be modified based on their answers. This survey was conducted using Google Forms online survey software.

RESULTS

On average, the responding practitioners had 15.9 years of experience, and most of them (78.2%) work in private practice. Most treated between 200 and 400 cases per year, of which 7% were surgical cases. Orthodontists who are familiar with and practice the surgery first protocol use it on average for 7 cases per year. The most frequent indication for the surgery first protocol was: transverse maxillary defects.

CONCLUSIONS

Surgery first protocol is a preferred option in cases of high severity since it prevents respiratory worsening during the pre-surgical orthodontic phase. The lack of a standardized protocol for this approach, at the pre-surgical and post-surgical levels, requires an increase in the number of high-level evidence publications to clarify the methods of application of this protocol.

Prediction accuracy of Dolphin software for soft-tissue profile in Class I patients undergoing fixed orthodontic treatment

BACKGROUND

Simulation and prediction can facilitate the decision between an extraction versus nonextraction treatment plan. This study aimed to assess the accuracy of Dolphin Imaging software in predicting profile changes in class I borderline cases.

METHODS

In this retrospective study, class I borderline patients (i.e., both extraction and nonextraction treatment plans were possible for them) aged 15-35 years were enrolled. All of the cephalometric analyses were done by Dolphin Imaging software, version 11.8 Premium. The initial cephalograms were superimposed on initial photographs. The final values for the 7 angular and linear landmarks of the upper and lower incisors were extracted from post-treatment cephalograms and inserted in the "Goals" tab of the Dolphin Imaging software. Post-treatment images of patients were simulated. Final post-treatment photographs were superimposed on the simulated pictures. The differences between the real and simulated pictures were calculated in relation to the reference lines. The P value was set at 0.05.

RESULTS

A total of 70 patients (36 with tooth extraction, and 34 without tooth extraction) were included. In the extraction group, the horizontal position of both lips was predicted to be significantly more protruded than it actually was, whereas in the nonextraction group, the only difference between the simulated and actual results was that the vertical position of the lower lip, which was simulated as being more inferior than it actually was.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the statistically significant differences between the real and simulated pictures, the differences were small and clinically insignificant. Prediction via Dolphin Imaging software can be an appropriate guide in extraction-nonextraction borderline cases.

Recent Trends in Orthognathic Surgery in Asia

Anatomy and standards of beauty are different between Asians and Westerners. Unlike Westerners, Asians have a wide and prominent jaw shape but prefer a slim and soft face shape. To achieve this goal, maxillary setback and/or posterior impaction surgeries are popular among upper jaw surgery, and various adjuvant surgeries are performed simultaneously on the mandible to obtain the so-called oval shape or V-line face. In addition, according to the development of virtual surgery software and orthodontic treatment techniques, the surgery-first approach is now accepted as a reliable option for orthognathic surgery if it is indicated.

Cephalometric analyses for cleft patients: a statistical approach to compare the variables of Delaire's craniofacial analysis to Bergen analysis

Objectives

Cephalometric analyses using lateral craniofacial radiographs are common diagnostic procedures for evaluating skeletal patterns. However, in patients with pronounced abnormalities like cleft lip and palate, standard cephalometric analyses and landmarks may not be suitable. This study aims to clarify whether the inclusion of landmarks less compromised by the cleft defect or located outside the cleft area results in a different cephalometric assessment of the viscerocranium. Delaire’s whole-skull analysis and Bergen analysis were examined for similarities and underlying common observations.

Materials/methods

Based on the cephalometric evaluation of 217 patients with different types of non-syndromal cleft formation, Delaire and Bergen analysis were compared using three statistical methods: correlation analysis, factor analysis, and cluster analysis. Reproducibility was assessed by Bland–Altman plots, intraclass correlation coefficients, mean absolute differences, and coefficients of variability.

Results

Although Delaire analysis and Bergen analysis are based on different concepts and landmarks, a majority of corresponding variables was found. Certain aspects of craniofacial base relation and craniospinal articulation are only assessed by Delaire analysis. All but one variable showed very good reproducibility.

Conclusions

The inclusion of landmarks less compromised by or located outside the cleft area does not result in variables that provide a different assessment of the viscerocranial area.

Clinical Relevance

The findings contradict the concept of invalidity of landmarks compromised by the cleft defect or located within the affected cleft area. Within the scope of its viscerocranial field of view, Bergen analysis appears to be on a par with Delaire analysis in the diagnosis of cleft patients.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00784-021-04006-3.