Factorial Analysis of Variables Influencing Mechanical Characteristics in Le Fort I Osteotomy Using FEA and Statistics-Based Taguchi Method
- 75 Downloads
This study investigated the Le Fort I osteotomy biomedical interactions for multi-factorial parameters (bone healing situation, cortical bone thickness, mini-plate fixation type, and screw length) under oblique load conditions using a nonlinear finite element (FE) approach. Nonlinear FE analysis was used to simulate the screw/plate and plate/bone and the bone healing adaptations with osseous nonunion in Le Fort I osteotomy models. The Taguchi method was used to identify the importance of each parameter and determine an optimal biomechanical response. With respect to relative micro-movement between the two bone segments and the magnitude of the stress values in the mini-plates, the bone healing situation had the dominant effect. The main effect plot showed that osseous nonunion increased the micro-movements and mini-plate stress values. Cortical bone thickness, mini-plate fixation type and screw length did not significantly affect the micro-movement and stress values. The combined use of FE analysis and the Taguchi method facilitated effective Le Fort I osteotomy mechanical characteristics evaluation.
KeywordsLe Fort I osteotomy Finite element Taguchi Bone healing
This study in part by MOST Project 103-2221-E-010 -012 -MY3 of the Ministry of Science and Technology, Taiwan and Project CRRPG5C0292 of Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Tao-yuan, Taiwan.
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflicts of interest
The authors have no conflicts of interests to declare.
- 1.Ataç, M. S., Erkmen, E., Yücel, E., & Kurt, A. (2008). Comparison of biomechanical behaviour of maxilla following Le Fort I osteotomy with 2-versus 4-plate fixation using 3D-FEA. Part 1: Advancement surgery. International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, 37(12), 1117–1124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 7.Bell, W. H., & Levy, B. M. (1969). Revascularization and bone healing after posterior maxillary osteotomy. Journal of Oral Surgery (American Dental Association: 1965), 27(4), 249–255.Google Scholar
- 8.Bell, W. H., & Levy, B. M. (1971). Revascularization and bone healing after posterior maxillary osteotomy. Journal of Oral Surgery (American Dental Association: 1965), 29(5), 313–320.Google Scholar
- 9.Bell, W. H., Fonseca, R. J., Kenneky, J. W., & Levy, B. M. (1975). Bone healing and revascularization after total maxillary osteotomy. Journal of Oral Surgery (American Dental Association: 1965), 33(4), 253–260.Google Scholar
- 17.Lin, C. L., Chang, S. H., Chang, W. J., & Kuo, Y. C. (2007). Factorial analysis of variables influencing mechanical characteristics of a single tooth implant placed in the maxilla using finite element analysis and the statistics-based Taguchi method. European Journal of Oral Sciences, 115(5), 408–416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 18.Phadke, M. S. (1995). Quality engineering using robust design. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
- 21.White, R. P., & Sarver, D. M. (2003). Contemporary treatment of dentofacial deformity (pp. 298–299). St Louis, MO: Mosby.Google Scholar
- 23.Ueki, K., Marukawa, K., Shimada, M., Nakagawa, K., Alam, S., & Yamamoto, E. (2006). Maxillary stability following Le Fort I osteotomy in combination with sagittal split ramus osteotomy and intraoral vertical ramus osteotomy: A comparative study between titanium miniplate and poly-l-lactic acid plate. Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, 64(1), 74–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar