Author Topic: Re: BSSO vs IVRO  (Read 4273 times)

neferkitti

  • Private
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 223
  • Karma: 18
  • Gender: Female
Re: BSSO vs IVRO
« on: August 04, 2012, 01:06:57 PM »
This approach would likely be good for those with little to no jaw angle, yes? Wonder why BSSO is used more often. Easier for surgeon and shorter patient discomfort? I would rather be wired shut for many weeks to avoid nerve damage. Aside from a squarer jaw, which is probably not a bad thing for a lot of male patients, why put the nerves at risk? There must be more drawbacks not discussed.

Mighty_Mouth

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 16
  • Karma: 1
Re: BSSO vs IVRO
« Reply #1 on: May 25, 2013, 07:35:50 PM »
I had IVRO, and I'm a class II (wish I could say "was," but I still am, unfortunately).  The reason my surgeon chose IVRO was that it is less traumatic to to the joints (he explained it, but I can't remember exactly why now, but I think you could google it).  The other main reason was for asymmetry.  He said IVRO is better for severe asymmetry compared to BSSO if the mandible does not require forward movement.  I believe when he did the posterior impaction of my maxilla, I had enough auto-rotation to correct the class II.  He knew that IVRO was a possibility, but even after the model surgery, he was not entirely sure I'd have enough auto-rotation.  He did the maxilla first, and then made the decision for the IVRO. 

I think the two big drawbacks to IVRO are patient discomfort (it is not fun to be wired for six weeks) and stability.  Muscles are strong, and there can be bony shifts when wired.  This is less so the case with rigid fixation.

Yes, IVRO is primarily for underbites, because it is not possible to bring the mandible forward with IVRO, but it is possible to set it back to correct an underbite.

I have numbness, but I think it's from the genio.

stupidjaws

  • CFO
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 585
  • Karma: 46
  • The panic the vomit the yuppies networking
Re: BSSO vs IVRO
« Reply #2 on: May 26, 2013, 06:33:10 PM »
thanks might mouth. your knowledge is really helpful.

juliedoublejaw

  • Guest
Re: BSSO vs IVRO
« Reply #3 on: June 12, 2013, 01:28:54 PM »
My surgeon wants me to have IVRO because he says the risk of permanent numbness is greatly reduced. I want to ask him why it seems everyone has BSSO instead if it usually leads to permanent numbness.

pekay

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 428
  • Karma: 15
Re: BSSO vs IVRO
« Reply #4 on: June 12, 2013, 02:11:44 PM »
My surgeon wants me to have IVRO because he says the risk of permanent numbness is greatly reduced. I want to ask him why it seems everyone has BSSO instead if it usually leads to permanent numbness.

Are you a Class II or III? the only downside to having an IVRO is being wired shut for ~6 weeks, A LOT of people re-act badly to that (getting nauseous, urge to throw up, feeling suffocated, etc..)

How old are you?
Chopsticks > Spoons

Purkulator

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 10
  • Karma: 0
Re: BSSO vs IVRO
« Reply #5 on: January 19, 2014, 03:23:25 AM »
Any updates on this IVRO vs BSSO business?
I mean if it pretty much avoids nerve damage altogether I think being wired for 6 weeks isnt a big deal. You hear with BSSO you will be wired then put on elastics anyway so not much difference.

Optimistic

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 579
  • Karma: 18
  • Gender: Male
  • I am class I
Re: BSSO vs IVRO
« Reply #6 on: January 21, 2014, 02:33:35 PM »
Any updates on this IVRO vs BSSO business?
I mean if it pretty much avoids nerve damage altogether I think being wired for 6 weeks isnt a big deal. You hear with BSSO you will be wired then put on elastics anyway so not much difference.

Most surgeons don't wire for a BSSO, just elastics.
01/10/14 - Last night I spilt spaghetti sauce on my chin for the very first time in my life and cried.

Purkulator

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 10
  • Karma: 0
Re: BSSO vs IVRO
« Reply #7 on: January 21, 2014, 05:26:33 PM »
I thought the standard was wire, then elastics? Has that changed now?