Die Rolle des Kieferorthopäden für die Motivation zu chirurgisch-kieferorthopädischen Therapiemaßnahmen

Ehmer, U; Austermann, K. H.

doi:10.1007/bf02178884

Cited by 5 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The authors' methodology is based on the principles of model surgery planning on dental casts described by Ehmer et al [5][6][7][8][9]. This system is part of the standard planning of orthognathic surgery at the University of Münster that includes the fabrication of intermediate and final gnathological splints using the semi-adjustable articulator SAM 2P (SAM Präzisionstechnik GmbH, Gauting, Germany).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The University Münster model surgery system for orthognathic surgery - The digital update

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim The aim of this work is to present a digital methodology of a conventional articulator based planning protocol. Methods The digital counterpart consists of intra-oral scans (3Shape) and a free available 3D mesh software (Meshmixer, Autodesk). The maxillary position in relation to the reference plane used and the arbitrary hinge axis were determined mathematically from landmarks on cephalometric x-rays and frontal photographs. Distances and angles were calculated to virtually mount the digital jaws in Meshmixer’s wold frame. Virtual planning is done by cloning and moving the jaws according to the preliminary surgery plan. The spatial movements of the jaws are measured by attached reference points. Results This digital approach eliminate the need for articulator hardware and laboratory plaster work. It enables all planning scenarios as they are also possible with conventional plaster-based procedures. The method is time-saving, practical and cost-effective. Standard dimensions of articulators and face-bows have been incorporated in the implementation. This reduction of individual patient values puts the accuracy of the presented method within the range of conventional model surgery. Conclusion Arbitrary planning will continue to have its place in orthognathic surgery, especially when digital methods can improve the overall process. The method presented can be seen as a cost-effective alternative for patients who do not require technically complex planning.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Fig 5. Pivots are used as measurement points on the surface of the jaws, which bind a 3D location to an object…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The University Münster model surgery system for orthognathic surgery - The digital update

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The DMMS was developed based on conventional plaster surgery described by Ehmer et al [14][15][16]. Similarly to conventional planning using the SAM 2P semi-adjustable articulator (SAM Präzisionstechnik GmbH, Gauting, Germany), the starting position is the virtual mounting, i.e., the correct alignment of the maxillary and mandibular scans relative to a reference plane and the hinge axis.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Position of the Virtual Hinge Axis in Relation to the Maxilla in Digital Orthognathic Surgery Planning—A k-Means Cluster Analysis

Stamm,

Kanemeier,

Dirksen

et al. 2023

JCM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this study was to investigate a possible relation between skeletal phenotypes and virtual mounting data in orthognathic surgery patients. A retrospective cohort study including 323 female (26.1 ± 8.7 years) and 191 male (27.9 ± 8.3 years) orthognathic surgery patients was conducted. A k-means cluster analysis was performed on the mounting parameters: the angle α between the upper occlusal plane (uOP) and the axis orbital plane (AOP); the perpendicular distance (AxV) from the uOP to the hinge axis; and the horizontal length (AxH) of the uOP from upper incisor edge to AxV, with subsequent statistical analysis of related cepalometric values. Three clusters of mounting data were identified, representing three skeletal phenotypes: (1) balanced face with marginal skeletal class II or III and α=8∘, AxV = 36 mm and AxH = 99 mm; (2) vertical face with skeletal class II and α=11∘, AxV = 27 mm and AxH = 88 mm; (3) horizontal face with class III and α=2∘, AxV = 36 mm and AxH = 86 mm. The obtained data on the position of the hinge axis can be applied to any digital planning in orthognathic surgery using CBCT or a virtual articulator, provided that the case can be clearly assigned to one of the calculated clusters.

show abstract

“…Orthognathic surgery treatment is a so-called “Two-Captains-Doctrine” where the surgeon and orthodontist have different responsibilities in their own therapy area [ 2 ]. With pre- and/or postoperative orthodontics, the orthodontist is involved for the longest period of treatment and is, in the end, responsible for proper occlusion and masticatory function.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

In Vivo Accuracy of a New Digital Planning System in Terms of Jaw Relation, Extent of Surgical Movements and the Hierarchy of Stability in Orthognathic Surgery

Stamm

Andriyuk

Kleinheinz

et al. 2022

JPM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This retrospective cohort study compares the virtual planned and postoperative jaw positions in patients undergoing orthognathic surgery. Surgery was virtually planned with the Digital Münster Model Surgery system (DMMS). Primary outcome: Spatial difference in the maxillo-mandibulo relation between virtual planning and postoperative result. Secondary outcome: Possible relationship between the measured differences and surgical movements as well as the postoperative stability according to Proffit. Ninety female and sixty-one male patients were included in the study. The average translation errors were 0.54 ± 0.50 mm (anteroposterior), 0.37 ± 0.33 mm (mediolateral), and 0.33 ± 0.28 mm (superoinferior). Orientation errors were 0.86 ± 0.79 degrees (yaw), 0.54 ± 0.48 degrees (roll), and 0.90 ± 0.72 degrees (pitch). The surgical procedures do not differ with respect to their error sizes. Maxilla forward and class II maxilla up with mandible forward are the most precise procedures. Most significant differences were found in the anteroposterior direction, whereby the extent of the surgical movement has no effect on the magnitude of the error. The process of planning with the DMMS followed by surgery is highly accurate and shows error values well below the clinically accepted limit of two millimeters in translation and four degrees in rotation.

show abstract

Die Rolle des Kieferorthopäden für die Motivation zu chirurgisch-kieferorthopädischen Therapiemaßnahmen

Cited by 5 publications

References 13 publications

The University Münster model surgery system for orthognathic surgery - The digital update

The University Münster model surgery system for orthognathic surgery - The digital update

The Position of the Virtual Hinge Axis in Relation to the Maxilla in Digital Orthognathic Surgery Planning—A k-Means Cluster Analysis

In Vivo Accuracy of a New Digital Planning System in Terms of Jaw Relation, Extent of Surgical Movements and the Hierarchy of Stability in Orthognathic Surgery

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About