Page 282 - Demo

Chapter 10280undergoing alloplastic TMJR exhibited better results for all outcomes, including dietary function, pain, and maximal mouth opening. However, it should be noted that no patient in the study had a mandibular defect other than the condylar abnormality. One disadvantage of using eTMJR is that in Elledge M3 and M4 cases, occlusal rehabilitation would not be feasible, whereas an osseous flap would offer the possibility for root-shaped implants. Elledge M2 cases could, however, still be helped with an extended wrap around the bridge, based on root-shaped implants in the symphyseal region. Further comparative studies are necessary to determine the patient groups, for which eTMJR is most appropriate and accompanied by the highest patient satisfaction.Table 3. Patient demographics, pathology, surgery classification and subclassification, and additional treatmentsCase#, sexPathology Age at eTMJR (years)Laterality Cl Div Other corrective osteotomiesOther procedures at a later date1, female Hemifacial microsomia22 Left M0 O, C, A Le Fort I-type osteotomy, sliding genioplastyFree gluteal fat transplantation2, female Posttraumatic angle defect and malunion43 Left M2 O, - -3, male TMJ ankylosis and osteomyelitis with failed microvascular fibula replacement46 Right M2 O, C - AMSJI, root implants4, female Condylar resorption after bimaxillary surgery25 Left and rightM0 O, A TPD -5, female Resection of fibrous dysplasia and loss of subsequent iliac bone graft25 Left M2-3 O - -Abbreviations: AMSJI=Additively manufactured subperiosteal jaw implant; Cl=Classification according to Elledge et al.(3); Div=Suggested subclassification according to occlusal correction (O), C=Contralateral mandibular osteotomy; A=Extra contour correction by augmentation (A); eTMJR=Extended alloplastic TMJ Replacement; TMJ=Temporomandibular joint; TPD=Transpalatal distraction osteogenesisNikolas de Meurechy NW.indd 280 05-06-2024 10:15