Which kind of miniplate to use in mandibular sagittal split osteotomy? An in vitro study

Júnior, Paulo Domingos Ribeiro; Magro‐Filho, Osvaldo; Shastri, Kalpakam; Papageorge, Maria B

doi:10.1016/j.ijom.2012.05.003

Cited by 14 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Gutwald et al13 verified in vitro that 2.0 mm locking plates show greater resistance than conventional plates and screws. Similar results have been reported by other authors14. The use of locking systems has been extensively proposed for use during treatment of facial fractures913, but their applications in orthognathic surgery deserve further attention1415.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 81%

Mechanical evaluation of the use of conventional and locking miniplate/screw systems used in sagittal split ramus osteotomy

Santos

Goulart

Sigua-Rodríguez

et al. 2017

J Korean Assoc Oral Maxillofac Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to compare the mechanical resistance of four different osteosyntheses modeled in two different sagittal split ramus osteotomy (SSRO) designs and to determine the linear loading in a universal testing machine.Materials and MethodsAn in vitro experiment was conducted with 40 polyurethane hemimandibles. The samples were divided into two groups based on osteotomy design; Group I, right angles between osteotomies and Group II, no right angles between osteotomies. In each group, the hemimandibles were distributed into four subgroups according to the osteosynthesis method, using one 4-hole 2.0 mm conventional or locking plate, with or without one bicortical screw with a length of 12.0 mm (hybrid technique). Each subgroup contained five samples and was subjected to a linear loading test in a universal testing machine.ResultsThe peak load and peak displacement were compared for statistical significance using PASW Statistics 18.0 (IBM Co., USA). In general, there was no difference between the peak load and peak displacement related to osteotomy design. However, when the subgroups were compared, the osteotomy without right angles offered higher mechanical resistance when one conventional or locking 2.0 mm plate was used. One locking plate with one bicortical screw showed higher mechanical resistance (162.72±42.55 N), and these results were statistically significantly compared to one conventional plate with monocortical screws (P=0.016) and one locking plate with monocortical screws (P=0.012). The difference in peak displacement was not statistically significant based on osteotomy design or internal fixation system configuration.ConclusionThe placement of one bicortical screw in the distal region promoted better stabilization of SSRO. The osteotomy design did not influence the mechanical behavior of SSRO when the hybrid technique was applied.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 81%

Mechanical evaluation of the use of conventional and locking miniplate/screw systems used in sagittal split ramus osteotomy

Santos

Goulart

Sigua-Rodríguez

et al. 2017

J Korean Assoc Oral Maxillofac Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Most studies did not describe the use of randomization 11,12,[14][15][16][17][20][21][22][24][25][26][27]29,30,32 . Other studies made use of randomization, although a detailed report of this process was missing 13,18,19,23,28,31,33,34 .…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…One study described the use of standardization without a detailed description 32 . The other articles did not report on the process of standardization in the fixation of RIF methods 13,14,16,23,24,[26][27][28][29][30][31]33,34 . Most studies made comparisons of original data [11][12][13][14][15][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34] , while three articles used the outcomes from earlier studies for comparison with new measurements 16,17,25 .…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fixation methods in sagittal split ramus osteotomy: a systematic review on in vitro biomechanical assessments

Kuik

Ruiter

Lange

et al. 2019

International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Mechanical studies of oral and maxillofacial osteotomies have been conducted using different experimental conditions, often with limited rationale for the use of these conditions . As a laboratory method with the ability to simulate mandibular movements perfectly is yet to be described, and given the complex nature of the interaction between the mandible and adjacent musculature, it is not possible to rely exclusively on biomechanical models to establish the best clinical options for fixation of mandibular sagittal split osteotomies …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fixation of sagittal split ramus osteotomy of the mandible: a comparative assessment of three techniques based on mechanical, photoelastic and finite element analysis

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim:The purpose of the present study was to compare the mechanical characteristics and stress distribution when using two plates, or two plates joined by bridge, in the fixation of sagittal split ramus osteotomy (SSRO). Material and methods: A 3D finite element model of a hemimandible was created and a 5 mm advancement SSRO was simulated on a computer model. The model was fixed using three different techniques: two plates; two plates joined by one bridge; and two plates joined by two bridges. Load was applied until 3 mm displacement was attained and the results were compared with previous mechanical and photoelastic tests, thus analysing the mechanical stress developed in the proximity of miniplates and screws, as well as within the fixation system itself. Results: Fixation with two separate plates produced better mechanical resistance in the mechanical test for peak displacement, peak and ending load. In the photoelastic test, the same group exhibited better stress distribution, far from the osteotomy line. In the finite element analysis, the best technique involved two plates joined by one bridge, with the results showing a more uniform stress distribution. Conclusions: This article may provide knowledge about the rational advantages of using two plates, which produced more mechanical resistance and better stress distribution. Clinical relevanceScientific rationale for study Several companies offer osteosynthesis products to use in orthognathic surgery. When the surgeon decided to use two 2.0 mm plates in the fixation of sagittal split ramus osteotomy, is the addition of one or two bridges between the plates improves mechanical stability? Principal findingsTwo plates without bridge showed highest mechanical resistance and better stress distribution for areas of thicker bone. Practical implicationsThis article provides knowledge about the advantages of choosing separated plates in the fixation of mandibular sagittal split osteotomies.Oral Surgery 10 (2017) e48--e54.

show abstract

Which kind of miniplate to use in mandibular sagittal split osteotomy? An in vitro study

Cited by 14 publications

References 27 publications

Mechanical evaluation of the use of conventional and locking miniplate/screw systems used in sagittal split ramus osteotomy

Mechanical evaluation of the use of conventional and locking miniplate/screw systems used in sagittal split ramus osteotomy

Fixation methods in sagittal split ramus osteotomy: a systematic review on in vitro biomechanical assessments

Fixation of sagittal split ramus osteotomy of the mandible: a comparative assessment of three techniques based on mechanical, photoelastic and finite element analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About