Skeletal Stability of Le Fort I Osteotomy Using Patient-specific Osteosynthesis Compared to Mini-plate Fixation for Patients With Dentofacial Disharmony
NCT ID: NCT05340036
Last Updated: 2022-06-01
Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
UNKNOWN
NA
30 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2022-05-26
2023-12-31
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Evaluation of Bilateral Alveolar Cleft Grafting With Micro Plate Stabilization Versus Conventional Grafting Technique
NCT06523855
The Use of Bone-borne Guides in Orthognathic Surgery Cases
NCT04224805
Evaluation of Marginal Bone Loss After Immediate Implant Placement in Esthetic Zone Without Xenograft.
NCT03397316
Comparison Between Two Techniques to Reposition the Maxilla After le Fort 1
NCT06132906
3D Interlocking Miniplates in Fixation of Mandibular Fractures in the Mental Foramen Region: A Split-mouth Study
NCT06939010
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Fixation systems with plates and screws are used in oral maxillofacial surgery for the treatment of facial fractures and orthognathic surgery cases. Although they have been used for decades and have become the standard treatment, the materials used in these systems may fail due to excess loading and other causal factors during the surgical procedure, including failure in plate adaptation and fixation to bone, material design, fabrication, and degree of purity of the plate material.
In the fixation system, non-customized plates of standard size are used, and are bent to adapt them to the distances required for planning orthognathic surgeries. Therefore, mandatory use of larger plates than those programmed for use in surgeries is required so that they can be bent to enable insertion. Moreover, there are variations in the number of screws required to retain the plates to enable better fixation. The folds of non-customized plates generate stresses that are minimized when using customized plates, because these plates are fabricated individually, with predetermined sizes for each patient.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
RANDOMIZED
PARALLEL
TREATMENT
DOUBLE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Group I (Conventional plates)
Digital intermediate and final interocclusal wafer splints will be designed to guide the maxilla and mandible in the desired position using CAD software (3-matic 11.0; Materialise NV, Leuven, Belgium).
The designed splints will be then exported in stereolithography (STL) file format to the additive CAM machine (FORMIGA P 110 printer; EOS e-manufacturing solutions, Munich, Germany) and manufactured in white polyamide (PA2200; EOS e-manufacturing solutions, Munich, Germany) using fused deposition modelling (FDM) technology.The splints will be cold sterilized by overnight immersion in 2% glutaraldehyde.
2.0 conventional mini plates will be used for fixation of maxilla and mandible in the new position.
Bimaxillary orthognathic surgery using conventional plates
le fort I osteotomy will carried out in the classic way guided by the classic landmarks (maxillary roots apices) as described by Wassmund.
Complete separation of the maxillary segment using chisels and mallets in regular fashion.
Reposition maxilla using the interocclusal wafer while mandible is gently positioned to centric relation position.
Mandible is maintained in place until fixation of the maxilla with plates and screws takes place.
Complete separation of the mandibular segment using chisels and mallets in regular fashion.
Repositioning of mandible using the final interocclusal wafer while condylar segment is gently positioned to centric relation position.
Fixation of mandibular segments with plates and/or screws in regular fashion.
Incision was closed with 4-0 resorbable sutures in a continuous running fashion.
Group II (Patient specific plates)
The cutting guides will be designed on the maxilla and mandible to orient the osteotomy and mark reference holes to be used later for the repositioning/ fixation plate, using CAD software.
The designed guide will be then exported in stereolithography (STL) file format to the additive CAM machine and manufactured in white polyamide using fused deposition modelling (FDM) technology. No finishing or polishing was done in order to maintain accuracy. The guides will be cold sterilized by overnight immersion in 2% glutaraldehyde.
The patient-specific osteosynthesis plates will be designed to fix the maxilla and mandible in the desired position making use of the previously established reference holes. The designed plates will be exported in STL file format to be manufactured in grade 5 titanium alloy utilizing selective laser sintering (SLS) technology on an additive CAM machine.
Bimaxillary orthognathic surgery using patient specific plates
The cutting guide of the maxilla will be placed onto the exposed bony surface and manipulated to the best fit.
Then, the guide will be fixed using four 2.0-mm screws to avoid any mobilization during drilling of the reference holes. Sixteen reference holes will be established using the cutting guide; eight on each side.
Then, a reciprocating saw will be used to perform the planned Le Fort I osteotomy. After adequate maxillary mobilization and removal of bony interferences, the maxilla will be repositioned using the patient-specific osteosynthesis material guided by the previously established reference holes and fixed using 2.0-mm screws.
Then, the mandibular cutting guide will be fixed in the same manner and bilateral sagittal split osteotomy will be carried out.
After adequate mobilization, the mandible will be repositioned by the patient-specific osteosynthesis material using the reference holes made by cutting guide and fixed using 2.0-mm screws.
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Bimaxillary orthognathic surgery using conventional plates
le fort I osteotomy will carried out in the classic way guided by the classic landmarks (maxillary roots apices) as described by Wassmund.
Complete separation of the maxillary segment using chisels and mallets in regular fashion.
Reposition maxilla using the interocclusal wafer while mandible is gently positioned to centric relation position.
Mandible is maintained in place until fixation of the maxilla with plates and screws takes place.
Complete separation of the mandibular segment using chisels and mallets in regular fashion.
Repositioning of mandible using the final interocclusal wafer while condylar segment is gently positioned to centric relation position.
Fixation of mandibular segments with plates and/or screws in regular fashion.
Incision was closed with 4-0 resorbable sutures in a continuous running fashion.
Bimaxillary orthognathic surgery using patient specific plates
The cutting guide of the maxilla will be placed onto the exposed bony surface and manipulated to the best fit.
Then, the guide will be fixed using four 2.0-mm screws to avoid any mobilization during drilling of the reference holes. Sixteen reference holes will be established using the cutting guide; eight on each side.
Then, a reciprocating saw will be used to perform the planned Le Fort I osteotomy. After adequate maxillary mobilization and removal of bony interferences, the maxilla will be repositioned using the patient-specific osteosynthesis material guided by the previously established reference holes and fixed using 2.0-mm screws.
Then, the mandibular cutting guide will be fixed in the same manner and bilateral sagittal split osteotomy will be carried out.
After adequate mobilization, the mandible will be repositioned by the patient-specific osteosynthesis material using the reference holes made by cutting guide and fixed using 2.0-mm screws.
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
2. Patients with no signs or symptoms of active TMDs.
3. Highly motivated patients.
Exclusion Criteria
2. Patients with systemic diseases that may hinder the normal healing process or render the patient not fitting for general anaesthesia.
3. Patients with intra-bony lesions or infections that may retard the osteotomy healing.
18 Years
40 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Hassan Fahmy Hassan Alnimr
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Hassan Fahmy Hassan Alnimr
Principal Investigator
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Hassan Alnimr
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
Cairo University
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Faculty of Dentistry, Cairo University
Cairo, , Egypt
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
Central Contacts
Reach out to these primary contacts for questions about participation or study logistics.
Facility Contacts
Find local site contact details for specific facilities participating in the trial.
Role: primary
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
Ohba S, Nakao N, Nakatani Y, Yoshimura H, Minamizato T, Kawasaki T, Yoshida N, Sano K, Asahina I. Effects of Vertical Movement of the Anterior Nasal Spine on the Maxillary Stability After LeFort I Osteotomy for Pitch Correction. J Craniofac Surg. 2015 Sep;26(6):e481-5. doi: 10.1097/SCS.0000000000001968.
Lee CC, Xhori O, Tannyhill RJ, Kaban LB, Peacock ZS. Variables associated with stability after Le Fort I osteotomy for skeletal class III malocclusion. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2021 Sep;50(9):1203-1209. doi: 10.1016/j.ijom.2021.02.004. Epub 2021 Feb 28.
Wangsrimongkol B, Flores RL, Staffenberg DA, Rodriguez ED, Shetye PR. Skeletal and Dental Correction and Stability Following LeFort I Advancement in Patients With Cleft Lip and Palate With Mild, Moderate, and Severe Maxillary Hypoplasia. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2022 Jan;59(1):98-109. doi: 10.1177/1055665621996108. Epub 2021 Mar 15.
Ramos VF, Pinto LAPF, Basting RT. Force and deformation stresses in customized and non-customized plates during simulation of advancement genioplasty. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2017 Nov;45(11):1820-1827. doi: 10.1016/j.jcms.2017.08.021. Epub 2017 Aug 31.
Stokbro K, Borg SW, Andersen MO, Thygesen T. Patient-specific 3D printed plates improve stability of Le Fort 1 osteotomies in vitro. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2019 Mar;47(3):394-399. doi: 10.1016/j.jcms.2018.12.015. Epub 2019 Jan 3.
Kotaniemi KVM, Heliovaara A, Kotaniemi M, Stoor P, Leikola J, Palotie T, Suojanen J. Comparison of postoperative skeletal stability of maxillary segments after Le Fort I osteotomy, using patient-specific implant versus mini-plate fixation. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2019 Jul;47(7):1020-1030. doi: 10.1016/j.jcms.2019.04.003. Epub 2019 Apr 27.
Buijs GJ, van Bakelen NB, Jansma J, de Visscher JG, Hoppenreijs TJ, Bergsma JE, Stegenga B, Bos RR. A randomized clinical trial of biodegradable and titanium fixation systems in maxillofacial surgery. J Dent Res. 2012 Mar;91(3):299-304. doi: 10.1177/0022034511434353. Epub 2012 Jan 23.
Larsen AJ, Van Sickels JE, Thrash WJ. Postsurgical maxillary movement: a comparison study of bone plate and screw versus wire osseous fixation. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1989 Apr;95(4):334-43. doi: 10.1016/0889-5406(89)90167-4.
Park JH, Kim M, Kim SY, Jung HD, Jung YS. Three-dimensional analysis of maxillary stability after Le Fort I osteotomy using hydroxyapatite/poly-L-lactide plate. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2016 Apr;44(4):421-6. doi: 10.1016/j.jcms.2016.01.011. Epub 2016 Jan 19.
Hanafy M, Akoush Y, Abou-ElFetouh A, Mounir RM. Precision of orthognathic digital plan transfer using patient-specific cutting guides and osteosynthesis versus mixed analogue-digitally planned surgery: a randomized controlled clinical trial. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2020 Jan;49(1):62-68. doi: 10.1016/j.ijom.2019.06.023. Epub 2019 Jun 29.
Al-Delayme R, Al-Khen M, Hamdoon Z, Jerjes W. Skeletal and dental relapses after skeletal class III deformity correction surgery: single-jaw versus double-jaw procedures. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol. 2013 Apr;115(4):466-72. doi: 10.1016/j.oooo.2012.08.443. Epub 2012 Nov 22.
Dupont WD, Plummer WD Jr. Power and sample size calculations. A review and computer program. Control Clin Trials. 1990 Apr;11(2):116-28. doi: 10.1016/0197-2456(90)90005-m.
Suojanen J, Leikola J, Stoor P. The use of patient-specific implants in orthognathic surgery: A series of 32 maxillary osteotomy patients. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2016 Dec;44(12):1913-1916. doi: 10.1016/j.jcms.2016.09.008. Epub 2016 Sep 23.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
OMFS 3 3 7
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.