Skip to content
DraconiticResearch
Search Sources API
194,164 studies31 sourcesUpdated 14 min ago
Peer-reviewedCC BYCraniomaxillofacial trauma & reconstruction

Patient-Reported Outcomes Following Minimally Invasive Versus Conventional Orthognathic Surgery.

  • Felix Jose Amarista1
  • Hannah Grimes2
  • Domenic Digioia2
  • Edward Ellis2
  1. 1Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC 29425, USA.
  2. 2Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, University of Texas Health San Antonio, San Antonio, TX 78229, USA.
Read full textPDFDOICite

Abstract

Minimally invasive orthognathic surgery (MIOS) aims to reduce surgical morbidity and improve postoperative recovery; however, its effect on patient-reported recovery and quality of life compared with conventional orthognathic surgery (COS) remains unclear. This prospective longitudinal cohort study included patients with dentofacial deformities undergoing bimaxillary orthognathic surgery between June 2025 and June 2026. Patient-reported outcomes were assessed using the Short-Term Expectations (STE), Postsurgical Perceptions (PSP), Orthognathic Quality of Life Questionnaire (OQLQ), and Oral Health Impact Profile-14 (OHIP-14). Longitudinal outcomes were evaluated using linear mixed-effects models. Forty-one patients were included (20 COS and 21 MIOS), with no losses to follow-up. PSP, OHIP-14, and OQLQ scores changed significantly over time (all p < 0.001), without significant differences in recovery trajectories between groups. The largest observed PSP difference occurred at 1 week (COS, 102.5 ± 30.1; MIOS, 84.5 ± 26.2; p = 0.082). Higher baseline STE scores were independently associated with higher postoperative PSP scores (β = 7.40; SE = 2.87; p = 0.014). Although differences between-group were not statistically significant, postoperative symptom scores were lower in the MIOS cohort throughout follow-up, with the greatest difference observed during early recovery. Larger studies are needed to determine whether these observed differences represent clinically meaningful patient-reported benefits of MIOS.

Related

  1. Patient-Reported Outcomes Following Two-Tined Three-Site Conventional Radiofrequency Ablation of Genicular Nerves for Chronic Knee Pain.
    Mingda Chen, Sercan Tosun, Nicolas R Thompson +1
    CureusPeer-reviewedCC BYFull textSurgery & anaesthesiaEurope PMC
  2. Piezoelectric Versus Conventional Osteotomy Instruments in Bimaxillary Orthognathic Surgery: A Narrative Review of Surgical Efficiency, Safety, and Clinical Outcomes
    Renato Isufi, Aurora Isufi, Ramazan Isufi +1
    Journal of Clinical MedicinePeer-reviewedCC BY 4.0Full textGeneral medicineCrossrefEurope PMC
  3. Minimally Invasive Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting (MICS-CABG) Versus Conventional Off-Pump Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting (OPCAB): A Single-Center Analysis of Early Outcomes and Institutional Experience
    Muhammad Yasir Khan
    CureusPeer-reviewedCC BYFull textGeneral medicineEurope PMC
  4. Gender differences in pre-surgical motivations, expectations, and patient-reported outcomes in Class III orthognathic surgery patients: An item-level analysis
    Gizem Altundal, Asuman Deniz Gümrü Celikel, Gülnaz Marsan
    PLOS OnePeer-reviewedCC BY 4.0NutritionPhysiologyPLOS
  5. Intra-Patient Comparison of a Minimally Invasive Lid Treatment and Traditional Blepharoplasty: Patient and Surgeon-Reported Outcomes
    A. C. Victoria, R. E. Roth, M. N. Berkowitz +2
    medRxivPreprintAll rights reservedFull textGeneral medicinemedRxiv

Cite

BibTeXRIS
BibTeX
@article{amarista2026patientreported,
  title = {{Patient-Reported Outcomes Following Minimally Invasive Versus Conventional Orthognathic Surgery.}},
  author = {Felix Jose Amarista and Hannah Grimes and Domenic Digioia and Edward Ellis},
  journal = {Craniomaxillofacial trauma \& reconstruction},
  year = {2026},
  month = oct,
  doi = {10.3390/cmtr19040042},
  url = {https://europepmc.org/article/MED/42924653},
  note = {CC BY},
}
RIS
TY  - JOUR
TI  - Patient-Reported Outcomes Following Minimally Invasive Versus Conventional Orthognathic Surgery.
AU  - Felix Jose Amarista
AU  - Hannah Grimes
AU  - Domenic Digioia
AU  - Edward Ellis
PY  - 2026
DA  - 2026/10/15
JO  - Craniomaxillofacial trauma & reconstruction
DO  - 10.3390/cmtr19040042
UR  - https://europepmc.org/article/MED/42924653
AB  - Minimally invasive orthognathic surgery (MIOS) aims to reduce surgical morbidity and improve postoperative recovery; however, its effect on patient-reported recovery and quality of life compared with conventional orthognathic surgery (COS) remains unclear. This prospective longitudinal cohort study included patients with dentofacial deformities undergoing bimaxillary orthognathic surgery between June 2025 and June 2026. Patient-reported outcomes were assessed using the Short-Term Expectations (STE), Postsurgical Perceptions (PSP), Orthognathic Quality of Life Questionnaire (OQLQ), and Oral Health Impact Profile-14 (OHIP-14). Longitudinal outcomes were evaluated using linear mixed-effects models. Forty-one patients were included (20 COS and 21 MIOS), with no losses to follow-up. PSP, OHIP-14, and OQLQ scores changed significantly over time (all p < 0.001), without significant differences in recovery trajectories between groups. The largest observed PSP difference occurred at 1 week (COS, 102.5 ± 30.1; MIOS, 84.5 ± 26.2; p = 0.082). Higher baseline STE scores were independently associated with higher postoperative PSP scores (β = 7.40; SE = 2.87; p = 0.014). Although differences between-group were not statistically significant, postoperative symptom scores were lower in the MIOS cohort throughout follow-up, with the greatest difference observed during early recovery. Larger studies are needed to determine whether these observed differences represent clinically meaningful patient-reported benefits of MIOS.
SN  - 1943-3875
SN  - 1943-3883
ER  -