But I recall looking at the photo presentation and it looked like the photos were out of order where people may have been looking at a pre-op cross bite and not the post op. Also recall a post where you had to ask if people were sure they were looking at the right photo. But I don't see that entry anymore in this string either. So, it very well could be that some of the early responses you got here could have been reactions to mixed up photos.
I thought this could be the case as well but I had descriptions under each picture and had commented in the post clarifying which of the pictures was the post-op. I also emailed Gj making sure he was looking at the correct picture. I don't think there was a mix-up.
Some other points of confused presentation:
1: Not mentioning just how post-op you were. Had to search for that independent of any mention of such in your entry.) You're about 2 months post op right. How post op were the early photos you showed in your entry post were you called it your 'result'? How sure are you that people were not mixing up a post op with a pre-op when they gave initial responses?
The posters who commented knew how far along post-op I was.
2: Casting your ortho and surgeon in a bad light so soon because you're told you need to stay in braces longer as if that's a cop out for their not expanding your maxilla enough. What's so unusual of a in braces post op period taking some time to even things out? It took 6 months for the member 'post bimax' with AOB before he got his braces off.
Fair enough in regards to the first part, but I definitely didn't say staying in braces LONGER was a cop-out for not expanding my maxilla enough. How long I'm in braces is irrelevant, I don't care. What I meant was, I didn't want an outcome where 70% of the bite problem was fixed skeletally with surgery, and 30% was compensated for with orthodontics, because I wanted my bones in the best possible position. That's what I meant when I said I don't know why my surgeon is "over-relying on orthodontics to fix the discrepancies." I'm sure all my bite issues could have been fixed
somewhat without surgery at all. But you go for surgery to not have to rely on camouflage ortho, and that's what I felt was happening at the time WRT my cross-bite.
3: Presenting the cross bite as your '#1 concern' and main indication for the surgery. Oh no...could not possibly be that such things like recessed maxilla, the anterior open bite with posterior excess gum show and the speech problems you said you had some time back were the main concerns for the surgery. Now after what would have been the the main issues for having this surgery (which you did mention in prior posts), now suddenly the cross bite was your primary concern. Really?
I said it was my number 1 technical indication. Did I say it was my number one concern? I don't think I did. If I DID, I meant it was the number 1 thing a surgeon would point out in my consults. The most obvious thing. Yes, I had many other concerns as well.
4: Thinking you didn't have posterior impaction. You posted a photo elsewhere where you had a LOT of excess posterior gum show in the before and little to none in the after. Removal of all that excess posterior gum show is highly unlikely without posterior impaction. Although there are some situations where intrusion of the back teeth can help close the open bite, those cases are when someone does NOT have a lot of posterior gum show. Who knows. Maybe the surgeon didn't want to tell you that you had posterior impaction if he thought that would or that too much information could result in your getting it mixed up and alarm you in some way. Surgeons are LESS apt to leave out out information when they feel the patient has a good understandings of how things work from the get go. But if they feel a patient could get easily confused by tech details and would need excess time for explanations of them, they are MORE apt to leave them out. If you really want to know what kind of surgery you got, get your op. report.
Yes! Which is confusing. My posterior gum show is gone. I had a lot before. Also my mandible plane seems less steep. But I asked him a couple times before surgery about posterior impaction. I think at that point he thought I meant anterior impaction. Whatever maybe he was distracted.
But AFTER surgery he showed me his hand-written surgical report (Yes, very old school), which shows
1 mm vertical reduction at the back. He said the back was shortened
but only by a mm and that was from the saw cut and so he disregarded that as counting as a "posterior impaction." Looking at my gum show pre-op wouldn't you agree that I'd have needed more than 1 mm?
I doubt that he didn't want to tell me for fear of "worrying me" because by that point I understood what it was for, what it does, and how it would it benefit my face. I relayed that my orthodontist and I feel that my face is shorter which was a GOOD thing and I thanked him for that, and then inquired whether this achieved with posterior impaction. He replied with the above ^
"well yeah but only by 1 mm" and said if anything my face was LONGER because of the anterior drop-down of 3 mm. Lol so if anything his denial of impaction would have alarmed me more than conceding to it.
Some pointers for you:
Next time you have a surgery, establish what the estimated POST OP period is meant to be before you start jumping the gun, alarming yourself it was done wrong and you need a revision or need to sue and drawing others into the alarm system. Consider making clear how post op you are. Consider using time lines for your pre-ops. If you have 2 pre-ops, put a time line on both of them instead of saying, 'Heres my 6 month pre-op' and just calling the other one just your 'pre-op sans timeline of it. Put as many photos as you can on one imger link and use the text function to note the timeline of each photo for easy comparison with minimal confusion.
As I said I did write descriptors under each picture, by simply "Pre-op" I meant immediately before surgery as in 1-2 weeks before as in I was already ready orthodontically for 2 months before my surgery date and so it was irrelevant to add an exact timeline. My point was that this was my final bite that had me ready for surgery.
As to the question of whether or not you 'need a revision' or are 'still in cross bite', I didn't engage early on due to the confusing presentation and also because given that post op braces can take 6 months or so for some bites to fit into place, I felt it was too early to be even asking it.
I think you should just chill out because based on your most recent pics, it looks like your bite is coming along fine and just MAYBE the doctor was correct when he told you at your last visit you had no cross bite.
Fair enough. This is great news if I don't need a revision. I know it seems like I was overreacting but I did have many well-respected members here telling me to sue. I didn't open the thread claiming lawsuit.
