Yonsei Med J.  2009 Dec;50(6):814-817. 10.3349/ymj.2009.50.6.814.

Analysis of Soft Tissue Changes after Genioplasty in Skeletal Class III Dentofacial Deformity

• Kim SK
• Kim SG

• KMID: 1777096
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.3349/ymj.2009.50.6.814

Abstract

PURPOSE
The purpose of this study was to measure the anteroinferior changes and the degree of vertical changes to facilitate the prediction of treatment outcome in patients undergoing genioplasty only, genioplasty with bilateral sagittal split ramus osteotomy (BSSRO), genioplasty, or BSSRO and Lefort I osteotomy.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Serial cephalometry was performed on 25 patients at 1-year follow-up after genioplasty, to assess skeletal changes and relapse. Surgery was performed using conventional techniques.
RESULTS
The mean ratio was 0.9 : 1 of soft tissue to skeletal movement at pogonion, but the average difference between hard and soft tissue was large; thus, the prediction of anteroposterior soft tissue changes was quite inaccurate.
CONCLUSION
We observed a good correlation between the amount of hard versus soft tissue change with surgery in the horizontal direction, but a poor correlation in the vertical plane.

Keyword

Soft tissue changes; genioplasty; skeletal class III dentofacial deformity

MeSH Terms

Adolescent
Adult
Female
Humans
Male
Malocclusion, Angle Class III/pathology/*surgery
Mandible/pathology/*surgery
Osteotomy/methods
Osteotomy, Le Fort/methods
Reconstructive Surgical Procedures/*methods
Treatment Outcome
Young Adult

Figure

• 

  Fig. 1 Prior to surgery.

• 

  Fig. 2 One week after surgery.

• 

  Fig. 3 Six months after surgery.

• 

  Fig. 4 At the time of diagnosing dentofacial deformity, a line forming a 6-7° slope to the FH plane or SN plane was most frequently used as the transverse baseline. FH, Frankfurt horizontal; SN, sella-nasion.

Reference

1. Lee SH, Kwan TG, Kim CS, Jang HJ, Choi JK. Prediction of soft tissue Profile changes after mandibular set-back surgery. J Korean Assoc Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1998. 24:60–67.

2. Park HS, Ellis E 3rd, Fonseca RJ, Reynolds ST, Mayo KH. A retrospective study of advancement genioplasty. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1989. 67:481–489.

3. Hohl TH, Epker BN. Macrogenia: a study of treatment results, with surgical recommendations. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1976. 41:545–567.

4. Dolce C, Johnson PD, Van Sickels JE, Bays RA, Rugh JD. Maintenance of soft tissue changes after rigid versus wire fixation for mandibular advancement, with and without genioplasty. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2001. 92:142–149.

5. Bachmann J, Wisth PJ. Comparison of two methods of profile prediction in surgical treatment of mandibular prognathism. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1983. 41:17–23.

6. Ayoub AF, Mostafa YA, el-Mofty S. Soft tissue response to anterior maxillary osteotomy. Int J Adult Orthodon Orthognath Surg. 1991. 6:183–190.

7. Fanibunda KB. Changes in the facial profile following correction for mandibular prognathism. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1989. 27:277–286.

8. Busquets CJ, Sassouni V. Changes in the integumental profile of the chin and lower lip after genioplasty. J Oral Surg. 1981. 39:499–504.

9. Scheideman GB, Legan HL, Bell WH. Soft tissue changes with combined mandibular setback and advancement genioplasty. J Oral Surg. 1981. 39:505–509.

10. McDonnell JP, McNeill RW, West RA. Advancement genioplasty: a retrospective cephalometric analysis of osseous and soft tissue changes. J Oral Surg. 1977. 35:640–647.

11. Bell WH, Gallagher DM. The versatility of genioplasty using a broad pedicle. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1983. 41:763–769.

12. Wolford LM, Bates JD. Surgical modification for the correction of chin deformities. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1988. 66:279–286.