When occlusal alterations are not accompanied by paranasal deficiencies, mobilization of the maxilla via Le Fort I osteotomy should be made with a different design. In this preliminary report, a W-shaped osteotomy that doesn’t change the position of the maxillary bone surrounding the pyriform aperture was presented for the first time. Advantages and indications of this new procedure are discussed.
MommaertsMYMarxerH. A cephalometric analysis of the long-term, soft tissue profile changes which accompany the advancement of the mandible by sagittal split ramus osteotomies. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 1987;15(3):127–131.
2.
ArnettGWBergmanRT. Facial keys to orthodontic diagnosis and treatment planning. Part I. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1993;103(4):299–312.
3.
BellWH. Le Fort I osteotomy for correction of maxillary deformities. J Oral Surg1975;33(6):412–426.
4.
CollinsPEpkerBN. The alar base cinch: a technique for prevention of alar base flaring secondary to maxillary surgery. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1982;53(6):549–553.
5.
O’RyanFSchendelS. Nasal anatomy and maxillary surgery. II. Unfavorable nasolabial esthetics following the Le Fort I osteotomy. Int J Adult Orthodon Orthognath Surg. 1989;4(2):75–84.
6.
TartaroGSantagataMCorzoLRausoR. Tip upturning and maxillary advancement: the UT angle. J Craniofac Surg. 2008;19(5):1387–1390.
7.
MommaertsMYAbeloosJVDe ClercqCANeytLF. The effect of the subspinal Le Fort I-type osteotomy on interalar rim width. Int J Adult Orthodon Orthognath Surg. 1997;12(2):95–100.
8.
KinnebrewMCEmisonJW. Simultaneous maxillary and nasal reconstruction: an analysis of twenty-five cases. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 1987;15(6):312–325.
9.
RosenHM. Lip-nasal aesthetics following Le Fort I osteotomy. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1988;81(2):171–182.
