Perception of improvement after orthognathic surgery: the important variables affecting patient satisfaction

PURPOSE: We evaluated which factors affect patient satisfaction and if patient expectations were fulfilled after orthognathic surgery. METHODS: Questionnaires consisting of 14 questions were given 1 year after bimaxillary osteotomy for class-III correction to subjects. Six questions were answered using an 11-point rating scale based on a visual analog scale (VAS; 0 = poor; 10 = excellent). Also included were seven closed-form questions with yes/no answers, as well as one open question for 'further remarks'. Sagittal and vertical cephalometric parameters were determined on postoperative cephalograms. RESULTS: Seventy-seven patients (37 females, 40 males; mean age, 23.4 +/- 4.9 (SD) years) responded. The intention to undergo surgery only for aesthetic improvement was noted in 11.9% of patients; only improvement of chewing function in 15.5%; both in 71.4%; and none/don't know in 2.6%. Postoperative satisfaction was rated (in means) with 8.13 +/- 1.97 on VAS and correlated significantly with the opinions of friends and relatives. Facial aesthetics was rated 5.6 +/- 1.2 before surgery and 8.1 +/- 1.5 after surgery (p = 0.04). Preoperative chewing function was rated 5.65 +/- 1.8 and 8.03 +/- 1.51 after surgery (p = 0.014). TMJ disorders or hypoesthesia had no negative impacts. Cephalometric analyses revealed a significantly lower SNB (75.3 degrees +/- 2.7 degrees ; p = 0.033) in patients rating lower than grade 7 for overall satisfaction. For SNA and ArGoMe, no significant differences were observed. CONCLUSION: The most distinctive factors for patient satisfaction after orthognathic surgery were chewing function and facial aesthetics with respect to the lower face. Function, aesthetics, and even psychological aspects should be considered equally when planning surgery

The primary headaches: genetics, epigenetics and a behavioural genetic model

The primary headaches, migraine with (MA) and without aura (MO) and cluster headache, all carry a substantial genetic liability. Familial hemiplegic migraine (FHM), an autosomal dominant mendelian disorder classified as a subtype of MA, is due to mutations in genes encoding neural channel subunits. MA/MO are considered multifactorial genetic disorders, and FHM has been proposed as a model for migraine aetiology. However, a review of the genetic studies suggests that the FHM genes are not involved in the typical migraines and that FHM should be considered as a syndromic migraine rather than a subtype of MA. Adopting the concept of syndromic migraine could be useful in understanding migraine pathogenesis. We hypothesise that epigenetic mechanisms play an important role in headache pathogenesis. A behavioural model is proposed, whereby the primary headaches are construed as behaviours, not symptoms, evolutionarily conserved for their adaptive value and engendered out of a genetic repertoire by a network of pattern generators present in the brain and signalling homeostatic imbalance. This behavioural model could be incorporated into migraine genetic research