A Revision Mandibuloplasty

Causes, Indications, Surgical Methods and Treatment Outcomes

Sang Woo Lee, Jae Woo Heo, Yujin Myung, Ki Kap Kim, Ung Sik Jin

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

Abstract

Background: This paper aims to propose a classification system to categorize patients undergoing revision mandibuloplasty according to their dissatisfaction types. This paper also introduces various appropriate revision techniques and evaluates their outcomes. Through this classification system and suggested surgical techniques, surgeons can settle the disappointments experienced by patients after their primary mandibuloplasty, by realizing more natural-looking results. Methods: The study subjects consisted of 184 patients who underwent a revision mandibuloplasty from October 2010 to March 2016, conducted by a single surgeon at a single institution. The authors were able to classify the dissatisfaction into two primary types—(1) lack of an overall slender frontal facial contour and (2) unnatural and asymmetrical overall facial appearance due to over- or inaccurate resection of the bone. A self-evaluation of patient’s subjective satisfaction based on the scale from 1 to 5, both after the primary operation and after revision surgery, was compared. Results: Dissatisfaction type I accounted for 145 patients (78.8 percent). The number of patients classified into dissatisfaction type II was 39 (21.2 percent). Of the patients categorized into type I, those undergoing revision surgeries due to an under-corrected mandibular tubercle and parasymphysis showed the most remarkable improvement in self-satisfaction score after reoperation—from 2.3 to 4.0. Conclusion: To realize a natural-looking outcome in facial look through mandibular contouring, it is important not only to carefully consider the ratio and shape essential for an optimal slender facial contour, but also to minimize unnecessary resection of the bone. Level of Evidence IV: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)726-732
Number of pages7
JournalAesthetic Plastic Surgery
Volume43
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - 15 Jun 2019

Fingerprint

Reoperation
Bone and Bones
Diagnostic Self Evaluation
Evidence-Based Medicine
Patient Satisfaction
Surgeons

Keywords

  • Mandibuloplasty
  • Revision surgery

Cite this

Lee, Sang Woo ; Heo, Jae Woo ; Myung, Yujin ; Kim, Ki Kap ; Jin, Ung Sik. / A Revision Mandibuloplasty : Causes, Indications, Surgical Methods and Treatment Outcomes. In: Aesthetic Plastic Surgery. 2019 ; Vol. 43, No. 3. pp. 726-732.
@article{227f6dd536fe4d458a13c383ba08d644,
title = "A Revision Mandibuloplasty: Causes, Indications, Surgical Methods and Treatment Outcomes",
abstract = "Background: This paper aims to propose a classification system to categorize patients undergoing revision mandibuloplasty according to their dissatisfaction types. This paper also introduces various appropriate revision techniques and evaluates their outcomes. Through this classification system and suggested surgical techniques, surgeons can settle the disappointments experienced by patients after their primary mandibuloplasty, by realizing more natural-looking results. Methods: The study subjects consisted of 184 patients who underwent a revision mandibuloplasty from October 2010 to March 2016, conducted by a single surgeon at a single institution. The authors were able to classify the dissatisfaction into two primary types—(1) lack of an overall slender frontal facial contour and (2) unnatural and asymmetrical overall facial appearance due to over- or inaccurate resection of the bone. A self-evaluation of patient’s subjective satisfaction based on the scale from 1 to 5, both after the primary operation and after revision surgery, was compared. Results: Dissatisfaction type I accounted for 145 patients (78.8 percent). The number of patients classified into dissatisfaction type II was 39 (21.2 percent). Of the patients categorized into type I, those undergoing revision surgeries due to an under-corrected mandibular tubercle and parasymphysis showed the most remarkable improvement in self-satisfaction score after reoperation—from 2.3 to 4.0. Conclusion: To realize a natural-looking outcome in facial look through mandibular contouring, it is important not only to carefully consider the ratio and shape essential for an optimal slender facial contour, but also to minimize unnecessary resection of the bone. Level of Evidence IV: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266.",
keywords = "Mandibuloplasty, Revision surgery",
author = "Lee, {Sang Woo} and Heo, {Jae Woo} and Yujin Myung and Kim, {Ki Kap} and Jin, {Ung Sik}",
year = "2019",
month = "6",
day = "15",
doi = "10.1007/s00266-019-01333-5",
language = "English",
volume = "43",
pages = "726--732",
journal = "Aesthetic Plastic Surgery",
issn = "0364-216X",
publisher = "Springer New York",
number = "3",

}

A Revision Mandibuloplasty : Causes, Indications, Surgical Methods and Treatment Outcomes. / Lee, Sang Woo; Heo, Jae Woo; Myung, Yujin; Kim, Ki Kap; Jin, Ung Sik.

In: Aesthetic Plastic Surgery, Vol. 43, No. 3, 15.06.2019, p. 726-732.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - A Revision Mandibuloplasty

T2 - Causes, Indications, Surgical Methods and Treatment Outcomes

AU - Lee, Sang Woo

AU - Heo, Jae Woo

AU - Myung, Yujin

AU - Kim, Ki Kap

AU - Jin, Ung Sik

PY - 2019/6/15

Y1 - 2019/6/15

N2 - Background: This paper aims to propose a classification system to categorize patients undergoing revision mandibuloplasty according to their dissatisfaction types. This paper also introduces various appropriate revision techniques and evaluates their outcomes. Through this classification system and suggested surgical techniques, surgeons can settle the disappointments experienced by patients after their primary mandibuloplasty, by realizing more natural-looking results. Methods: The study subjects consisted of 184 patients who underwent a revision mandibuloplasty from October 2010 to March 2016, conducted by a single surgeon at a single institution. The authors were able to classify the dissatisfaction into two primary types—(1) lack of an overall slender frontal facial contour and (2) unnatural and asymmetrical overall facial appearance due to over- or inaccurate resection of the bone. A self-evaluation of patient’s subjective satisfaction based on the scale from 1 to 5, both after the primary operation and after revision surgery, was compared. Results: Dissatisfaction type I accounted for 145 patients (78.8 percent). The number of patients classified into dissatisfaction type II was 39 (21.2 percent). Of the patients categorized into type I, those undergoing revision surgeries due to an under-corrected mandibular tubercle and parasymphysis showed the most remarkable improvement in self-satisfaction score after reoperation—from 2.3 to 4.0. Conclusion: To realize a natural-looking outcome in facial look through mandibular contouring, it is important not only to carefully consider the ratio and shape essential for an optimal slender facial contour, but also to minimize unnecessary resection of the bone. Level of Evidence IV: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266.

AB - Background: This paper aims to propose a classification system to categorize patients undergoing revision mandibuloplasty according to their dissatisfaction types. This paper also introduces various appropriate revision techniques and evaluates their outcomes. Through this classification system and suggested surgical techniques, surgeons can settle the disappointments experienced by patients after their primary mandibuloplasty, by realizing more natural-looking results. Methods: The study subjects consisted of 184 patients who underwent a revision mandibuloplasty from October 2010 to March 2016, conducted by a single surgeon at a single institution. The authors were able to classify the dissatisfaction into two primary types—(1) lack of an overall slender frontal facial contour and (2) unnatural and asymmetrical overall facial appearance due to over- or inaccurate resection of the bone. A self-evaluation of patient’s subjective satisfaction based on the scale from 1 to 5, both after the primary operation and after revision surgery, was compared. Results: Dissatisfaction type I accounted for 145 patients (78.8 percent). The number of patients classified into dissatisfaction type II was 39 (21.2 percent). Of the patients categorized into type I, those undergoing revision surgeries due to an under-corrected mandibular tubercle and parasymphysis showed the most remarkable improvement in self-satisfaction score after reoperation—from 2.3 to 4.0. Conclusion: To realize a natural-looking outcome in facial look through mandibular contouring, it is important not only to carefully consider the ratio and shape essential for an optimal slender facial contour, but also to minimize unnecessary resection of the bone. Level of Evidence IV: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266.

KW - Mandibuloplasty

KW - Revision surgery

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85062092183&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s00266-019-01333-5

DO - 10.1007/s00266-019-01333-5

M3 - Article

VL - 43

SP - 726

EP - 732

JO - Aesthetic Plastic Surgery

JF - Aesthetic Plastic Surgery

SN - 0364-216X

IS - 3

ER -