Bone and Soft Tissue Changes after Two-Jaw Surgery in Cleft Patients

 

 Permissions and Reprints

Background Orthognathic surgery is required in 25% to 35% of patients with a cleft lip and palate, for whom functional recovery and aesthetic improvement after surgery are important. The aim of this study was to examine maxillary and mandibular changes, along with concomitant soft tissue changes, in cleft patients who underwent LeFort I osteotomy and sagittal split ramus osteotomy (two-jaw surgery).

Methods Twenty-eight cleft patients who underwent two-jaw surgery between August 2008 and November 2013 were included. Cephalometric analysis was conducted before and after surgery. Preoperative and postoperative measurements of the bone and soft tissue were compared.

Results The mean horizontal advancement of the maxilla (point A) was 6.12 mm, while that of the mandible (point B) was -5.19 mm. The mean point A-nasion-point B angle was -4.1° before surgery, and increased to 2.5° after surgery. The mean nasolabial angle was 72.7° before surgery, and increased to 88.7° after surgery. The mean minimal distance between Rickett's E-line and the upper lip was 6.52 mm before surgery and 1.81 mm after surgery. The ratio of soft tissue change to bone change was 0.55 between point A and point A' and 0.93 between point B and point B'.

Conclusions Patients with cleft lip and palate who underwent two-jaw surgery showed optimal soft tissue changes. The position of the soft tissue (point A') was shifted by a distance equal to 55% of the change in the maxillary bone. Therefore, bone surgery without soft tissue correction can achieve good aesthetic results.

Publication History

Received: 26 December 2014

Accepted: 22 April 2015

Article published online:
05 May 2022

© 2015. The Korean Society of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgeons. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial License, permitting unrestricted noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/)

Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA

• REFERENCES

• 1 DeLuke DM, Marchand A, Robles EC. et al. Facial growth and the need for orthognathic surgery after cleft palate repair: literature review and report of 28 cases. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1997; 55: 694-697
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 2 Ross RB. Treatment variables affecting facial growth in complete unilateral cleft lip and palate. Cleft Palate J 1987; 24: 5-77
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 3 Chang IH, Lee YJ, Park YG. A comparative study of soft tissue changes with mandibular one jaw surgery and double jaw surgery in Class III malocclusion. Korean J Orthod 2006; 36: 63-73
  Google Scholar
• 4 Sumi Y, Hata KI, Sawaki Y. et al. Clinical application of cultured oral epithelium for palatal wounds after palatoplasty: a preliminary report. Oral Dis 1999; 5: 307-312
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 5 Dua G, Navin Kumar A, Roy ID. et al. Maxillary distraction osteogenesis in cleft lip and palate cases with midface hypoplasia using rigid external distractor: an alternative technique. J Craniofac Surg 2014; 25: 746-751
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 6 Lee TS, Kim HY, Kim TH. Contouring of the lower face by a novel method of narrowing and lengthening genioplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg 2014; 133: 274e-282e
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar