A biomechanical evaluation of bilateral sagittal ramus osteotomy fixation techniques

Objectives: The purpose of this investigation was to evaluate and compare the biomechanical behavior of various rigid internal fixation plates designed to aid in the condylar positioning of bilateral sagittal ramus osteotomies, to positional screws in an inverted-L pattern, and a control. Materials and Methods: Fifty polyurethane synthetic mandible replicas (Synbone, Laudquart, Switzerland) were used in this investigation. Five controls and 5 each of 4 different fixation modalities (3 bicortical positional screws in an inverted-L pattern, monocortical 4-hole straight plates, monocortical. 6-hole curved plates, and monocortical adjustable 4-hole slide plates) were subjected to vertical loading at the incisal edge and torsional loading at the molar region by an Instron 1331 (Instron, Canton, MA) servohydraulic mechanical testing unit. Mechanical deformation data within a 0 to 900 N range were recorded. Yield load, yield displacement, and stiffness were determined. Means and standard deviations were derived and compared for statistical significance using a Fisher's Protected Least Significant Differences Test with a confidence level of 95% (P < .05). Second-order polynomial best-fit Curves were also created for each group to further evaluate mechanical behavior. Results: For incisal edge loading, statistically significant differences were noted between the control group and all other groups for yield load and stiffness, and between the control group and straight, curved, and slide plates for yield displacement. Differences were also noted between the inverted-L and straight, strut, and slide plates for yield load; and inverted-L and straight, curved, and slide, as well as straight and slide for yield displacement. For molar loading, statistically significant differences were noted between the control group and all other groups for yield load and stiffness. Differences were noted between the slide and straight, curved, and control; as well as between the inverted-L and straight and strut plates for yield displacement. Lastly, differences were noted between the straight and curved plates, and the slide and straight, curved, and inverted-L for stiffness. Conclusion: in this in vitro study, differences were noted between the control and all experimental groups in their abilities to resist loads under all of the conditions tested. Differences were also noted among specific experimental groups. Yet when placed in the context of functional parameters, only the bicortical positional screws in an inverted-L pattern met the requirements for both molar loading and incisal edge loading. (c) 2005 American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons.