Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorFariña R.
dc.contributor.authorOlate S.
dc.contributor.authorRaposo A.
dc.contributor.authorAraya I.
dc.contributor.authorAlister J.P.
dc.contributor.authorUribe F.
dc.date.accessioned2020-09-02T22:17:23Z
dc.date.available2020-09-02T22:17:23Z
dc.date.issued2016
dc.identifier10.1016/j.ijom.2015.07.016
dc.identifier.citation45, 1, 72-77
dc.identifier.issn09015027
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12728/4423
dc.descriptionThe objective of this study was to assess the need for secondary orthognathic surgery in patients undergoing two different condylectomy protocols for active unilateral condylar hyperplasia (UCH). A retrospective cohort study evaluated UCH patients treated by condylectomy. Two groups were established: group 1 comprised those who had undergone a high condylectomy (5 mm removed) and group 2 comprised those who had undergone a proportional condylectomy (removing the difference observed between the measurements of the hyperplastic and the healthy side). Data analysis was done with the Levene test and t-test; a P-value of <0.05 indicated a statistically significant relationship. Forty-nine patients, with an average age of 19.83 years, were analyzed; 11 were included in group 1 and 38 in group 2. There was no statistical difference between the two groups with regard to age or sex (P = 0.781). An average of 5.81 mm was removed in the high condylectomy group, while an average of 9.28 mm was removed in the proportional condylectomy group; this difference was statistically significant (P = 0.042). Comparing the two groups, proportional condylectomy reduced the need for secondary orthognathic surgery (P < 0.001). The proportional condylectomy can be used as the sole surgical treatment in cases of UCH, thus avoiding the need for secondary orthognathic surgery. © 2015 International Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons.
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherChurchill Livingstone
dc.subjectcondylar hyperplasia
dc.subjectcondylectomy
dc.subjectfacial asymmetry
dc.subjecthemimandibular elongation
dc.subjecthemimandibular hypertrophy
dc.subjecthigh condylectomy
dc.subjectlow condylectomy
dc.subjectmandibular condyle
dc.subjectorthognathic surgery
dc.subjectproportional condylectomy
dc.subjectadult
dc.subjectArticle
dc.subjectclinical article
dc.subjectcohort analysis
dc.subjectfemale
dc.subjecthigh condylectomy
dc.subjecthuman
dc.subjecthyperplasia
dc.subjectintermethod comparison
dc.subjectmale
dc.subjectmaxillofacial surgery
dc.subjectorthognathic surgery
dc.subjectosteotomy
dc.subjectproportional condylectomy
dc.subjectretrospective study
dc.subjectsurgical technique
dc.subjectunilateral condylar hyperplasia
dc.subjectdiagnostic imaging
dc.subjectface asymmetry
dc.subjecthyperplasia
dc.subjectmandible condyle
dc.subjectmandible osteotomy
dc.subjectorthodontics
dc.subjectpathology
dc.subjectphysiotherapy
dc.subjectreoperation
dc.subjectsagittal split ramal osteotomy
dc.subjectsurgery
dc.subjecttreatment outcome
dc.subjectx-ray computed tomography
dc.subjectyoung adult
dc.subjectFacial Asymmetry
dc.subjectFemale
dc.subjectHumans
dc.subjectHyperplasia
dc.subjectMale
dc.subjectMandibular Condyle
dc.subjectMandibular Osteotomy
dc.subjectOrthodontics, Corrective
dc.subjectOrthognathic Surgical Procedures
dc.subjectOsteotomy, Sagittal Split Ramus
dc.subjectPhysical Therapy Modalities
dc.subjectReoperation
dc.subjectRetrospective Studies
dc.subjectTomography, X-Ray Computed
dc.subjectTreatment Outcome
dc.subjectYoung Adult
dc.titleHigh condylectomy versus proportional condylectomy: Is secondary orthognathic surgery necessary?
dc.typeArticle


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record