Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33155066›Full record

ArticleClinical oral investigations2021

Complications or rather side effects? Quantification of patient satisfaction and complications after orthognathic surgery-a retrospective, cross-sectional long-term analysis.

Daniel G E Thiem, Daniel Schneider, Michael Hammel, Bassam Saka, Bernhard Frerich, Bilal Al-Nawas, Peer W Kämmerer

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical oral investigations, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

24 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 40 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Auditory Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Orthognathic Surgery: An Analysis of Middle Ear Disease.Otolaryngology--head and neck surgery : official journal of American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery · 2025
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Patient Satisfaction Following Orthognathic Surgery: A Systematic Review.Journal of maxillofacial and oral surgery · 2023
    Review
  19. Orthognathic Surgery and Relapse: A Systematic Review.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Daniel G E ThiemDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Facial Plastic Surgery, University Medical Centre Mainz, Augustusplatz 2, 55131, Mainz, Germany. daniel.thiem@uni-mainz.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4081-1487
Daniel SchneiderOral, Maxillofacial and Plastic Surgery, Rostock, Germany.
Michael Hammel, Sanitz, Germany.
Bassam SakaDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Facial Plastic Surgery, University Medical Centre Rostock, Schillingallee 35, 18057, Rostock, Germany.
Bernhard FrerichDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Facial Plastic Surgery, University Medical Centre Rostock, Schillingallee 35, 18057, Rostock, Germany.
Bilal Al-NawasDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, School of Dentistry, Kyung Hee University, Seoul, Korea.
Peer W KämmererDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Facial Plastic Surgery, University Medical Centre Mainz, Augustusplatz 2, 55131, Mainz, Germany.
University of Rostock · DEJohannes Gutenberg University Mainz · DEFundación Universitaria Sanitas · COKyung Hee University · KR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThe aim of this clinical analysis was to evaluate intraoperative and early postoperative complications as well as late findings and the overall patient satisfaction following orthognathic surgery. MATERIALS AND

methodsIn a retrospective, cross-sectional study, 119 patients after orthognathic surgery were included. Surgical approaches were single bilateral sagittal split osteotomy (BSSO (n = 52)), single LeFort-I osteotomy (n = 5) and bimaxillary osteotomy (LeFort-I + BSSO (n = 62)). Intraoperative and early (0-4 weeks postoperative) complications were investigated retrospectively (n = 119), whereas late findings and quality of life were assessed via clinical follow-up and survey (mean: 59 months postoperative) on 48 patients.

resultsBad split (n = 4/114) was the most common intraoperative complication followed by one case of severe bleeding. Regarding early postoperative complications, temporary damage of the inferior alveolar nerve after BSSO was most common (n = 33/114), followed by facial nerve dysfunction (n = 3), failed osteosynthesis (n = 2) and one case of postoperative dyspnoea. Permanent hypaesthesia of the lower lip was the most prevalent (n = 28/45

conclusionsLong-term complications after orthognathic surgery occurred more frequently than commonly described in the literature, and analyses of the quality of life show the need for more comprehensive preoperative patient education. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Hypaesthesia of the lower lip presented less as complication but rather as side effect following BSSO. As orthognathic surgery is mostly elective, preoperative patient education is of pivotal importance and should include proactive risk stratification.

Indexed as

Orthognathic SurgeryOrthognathic Surgical ProceduresCross-Sectional StudiesHumansOsteotomy, Sagittal Split RamusPatient SatisfactionPostoperative ComplicationsQuality of LifeRetrospective StudiesComplicationsElective surgeryPatient informationQoLSF-36Side effectSurgery

Identifiers

PMID33155066
PMCPMC8060167
OpenAlexW3096078548

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.