Banca de DEFESA: FELIPE ALEXANDER CALDAS AFONSO

Uma banca de DEFESA de MESTRADO foi cadastrada pelo programa.
STUDENT : FELIPE ALEXANDER CALDAS AFONSO
DATE: 14/09/2022
TIME: 10:30
LOCAL: DEPARTAMENTO DE ODONTOLOGIA - SALA DE AULAS DO SETOR DE PRÓTESE
TITLE:

COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE HEAD ORIENTATION METHODS FOR 3D VIRTUAL PLANNING OF ORTHOGNATHIC SURGERIES

KEY WORDS:

KEYWORDS: Orthognathic Surgery; Simulation; Facial asymmetry.

PAGES: 30
BIG AREA: Ciências da Saúde
AREA: Odontologia
SUBÁREA: Cirurgia Buco-Maxilo-Facial
SUMMARY:

INTRODUCTION 3D virtual computer simulation was a paradigm shift in the treatment of dentofacial deformities, however, the best way to achieve the Neutral Head Position (NHP) is still controversial. There is a lack of comparative studies between the present protocols to assess the degree of precision of the methods. This work aims to evaluate the degree of discrepancy between NHP methods in a virtual environment. METHODS Ten consecutively selected patients with dentofacial deformities were included in the analysis. Each patient underwent all the following protocols for acquiring the neutral head position: (A) The Procrustes Method – Primary Sagittal Plane; (B) The Charlotte Protocol Method; (C) The Universal Protocol Method. Cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) with CR bite registration were requested and impressions of both dental arches were taken for 3D scanning. Then, for the preparation and positioning of the composite skulls in the NHP, the Anatomic Aligner software (Houston Methodist Research Institute) was used. The discrepancies were evaluated by superimposing the 3D craniofacial models using the Gateno-Xia cephalometric analysis, followed by measurements of linear and angular differences. RESULTS In the cases analyzed in this study, when comparing the NHP acquisition methods with each other, the linear and angular values obtained are within of the limits recommended in the literature as being excellent (angular differences less than 2mm and 4°), with the largest linear deviation of 1.56 mm, and orientation of 1.96°, considering all oriented composite skulls. In addition, paired comparative analyzes between the NHP methods were performed, following those comparisons: Group A against Group B; Group A against Group C; and Group B against Group C. The authors observed that there were slight deviations from the values recommended in the literature only when comparing the anteroposterior linear axes Y (mm) between groups A and B, with 2.64 mm, and between groups B and C, with 2.2mm. Finally, statistical analysis of ANOVA did not show any statistically significant difference. DISCUSSION The authors confirm the hypothesis that all head orientation methods evaluated in this study do not present statistically significant differences (P>0.05) and consider that when and orientation of the skull-composite in a controlled environment and by professionals specialized and trained in the surgical area, all techniques for orientation of the head can be useful, accurate and valid for the desired result. This is because all this preparation is based on facial analysis and clinical data collected by the surgeon. CONCLUSION This study showed that there was no statistical difference in terms of precision between all the protocols listed for comparison, and it proved to be extremely important to provide surgeons with a reflection on which technique would be most appropriate for the treatment of patients with dentofacial deformities in its center, always considering the main aspects that facilitate the surgeon's clinical day: Simplicity of execution; less time spent; and familiarity with the technique.

COMMITTEE MEMBERS:
Presidente - 2379951 - ADRIANO ROCHA GERMANO
Interno - 3318536 - JOSE SANDRO PEREIRA DA SILVA
Externo à Instituição - LIOGI IWAKI FILHO - UEL