Predicting soft tissue changes in maxillary impaction surgery: A comparison of two video imaging systems

Angle Orthodontist

Volumn 67, Issue 5, 1997, Pages 347-354

  Sameshima, Glenn T ^a,b   Kawakami, Ruth K ^c   Kaminishi, Ronald M ^b   Sinclair, Peter M ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^c NONE

Author keywords

Orthognathic surgery; Prediction; Video imaging

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ARTICLE; ATTITUDE; CEPHALOMETRY; CHIN; COMPARATIVE STUDY; EVALUATION; FACE; FEMALE; FORECASTING; HUMAN; IMAGE PROCESSING; LIP; MALE; MALOCCLUSION; MANDIBLE; MAXILLA; NOSE; PATHOLOGY; PHOTOGRAPHY; REPRODUCIBILITY; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; VIDEORECORDING;

ADULT; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ATTITUDE; CEPHALOMETRY; CHIN; EVALUATION STUDIES; FACE; FEMALE; FORECASTING; HUMANS; IMAGE PROCESSING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; LIP; MALE; MALOCCLUSION; MANDIBLE; MAXILLA; NOSE; PHOTOGRAPHY; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; VIDEO RECORDING;

EID: 0030626148     PISSN: 00033219     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Review

References (28)

1. Laney TJ, Kuhn BS. Computer imaging in orthognathic and facial cosmetic surgery. Oral Maxillofac Clinics North Am 1990;2(4):659-668.
2. Sinclair PM, Kilpelainen P, Phillips C, White RP, Rogers L, Sarver DM. The accuracy of video imaging in orthognathic surgery. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1995;107(2):177-185.
3. Sarver DM, Johnston MW, Matukas VJ. Video imaging for planning and counseling in orthognathic surgery. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1988;46:939-945.
4. Sarver DM, Johnston MW. Video imaging: techniques for superimposition of cephalometric radiography and profile images. Int J Adult Orthod Orthognath Surg 1990;5(4):241-248.
5. Ackerman JL, Proffit WR. Communication in orthodontic treatment planning: bioethical and informed consent issues. Angle Orthod 1995;65(4):253-262.
6. Radney LJ, Jacobs JD. Soft-tissue changes associated with surgical total maxillary intrusion. Am J Orthod 1981;80(2):191-212.
7. Sakima T, Sachdeva R. Soft tissue response to LeFort I maxillary impaction surgery. Int J Adult Orthod Orthognath Surg 1987;2(4):221-231.
8. Stella JP, Streater MR, Epker BN, Sinn DP. Predictability of upper soft tissue changes with maxillary advancement. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1989;47(7): 697-703.
9. Ayoub AF, Mostafa YA, Mofty SE. Soft tissue response to anterior maxillary osteotomy. Int J Adult Orthod Orthognath Surg 1991;6(3):182-190.
10. Sarver DM, Weissman SM. Long-term soft tissue response to Le Fort I maxillary superior repositioning. Angle Orthod 1991;61(4):267-276.
11. Hack GA, de Mol van Otterloo JJ, Nanda R. Long-term stability and prediction of soft tissue changes after LeFort I surgery. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1993; 104(6):544-555.
12. Schendel SA, Eisenfeld JH, Bell WH, Epker BN. Superior repositioning of the maxilla: stability and soft tissue osseous relations. Am J Orthod 1976; 70(6):663-74.
13. Jensen AC, Sinclair PM, Wolford LM. Soft tissue changes associated with double jaw surgery. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1992; 101(3):266-275.
14. Dexter F, Chestnut DH. Analysis of statistical tests to compare analog scale measurements among groups. Anesthesiology 1995;82:896-902.
15. Syliangco SM, Sinclair PM, Sameshima GT, Kaminishi RM. The accuracy of video imaging in the prediction of mandibular advancement surgery. Angle Orthod (in press).
16. Konstantiantos KA, O'Reilly MT, Close J. The validity of the prediction of soft tissue profile changes after LeFort I osteotomy using the Dentofacial Planner (computer software). Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1994; 105(3): 241-249.
17. Hing NR. The accuracy of computer generated prediction tracings. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1989;18:148-151.
18. Upton PM. Evaluation of video imaging prediction in combined maxillary and mandibular orthognathic surgery (abstract). Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1994; 106(4):451.
19. Eales EA, Newton C, Jones ML, Sugar A. The accuracy of computerized prediction of the soft tissue profile: a study of 25 patients treated by means of the LeFort I osteotomy. Int J Adult Orthod Orthognath Surg 1994;9(2):141-152.
20. Bell R, Kiyak HA, Joondeph DR. Perceptions of facial profile and their influence on the decision to undergo orthognathic surgery. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1985;88:323.
21. Prahl-Anderson B, Boarsma H, Van der Linden FPGM. Perceptions of dentofacial morphology by lay persons, general dentists and orthodontists. J Am Dent Assoc 1979;98:209.
22. Burcal RG, Laskin DM, Sperry TP. Recognition of profile changes after simulated orthognathic surgery. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1987;45:666.
23. Romani KL, Agahi F, Nanda R, Zernik JH. Evaluation of horizontal and vertical differences in facial profiles by orthodontists and lay people. Angle Orthod 1993; 63(3):175-182.
24. Pogrel AM. What are normal esthetic values? J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1991;49(9):963-969.
25. Forsyth DB, Shaw WC, Richmond S, Roberts CT. Digital imaging of cephalometric radiographs, part 2: image quality. Angle Orthod 1996;66(1):43-50.
26. Sarver DM, Johnston MW. Orthognathic surgery and esthetics: planning treatment to achieve functional and esthetic goals. Brit J Orthod 1993;20:93-100.
27. Phillips C, Hill BJ, Cannac C. The influence of video imaging on patients' perceptions and expectations. Angle Orthod 1995;65(4):263-270.
28. Sarver DM. Video imaging: a computer facilitated approach to communication and planning in orthognathic surgery. Brit J Orthod 1993;20:187-191.