What is the most stable method for Bilateral Sagittal Split Osteotomy (BSSO) advancement in a young adult or adolescent patient with Class III malocclusion?

Medical Advisory BoardAll articles are reviewed for accuracy by our Medical Advisory Board
Educational purpose only • Exercise caution as content is pending human review
Article Review Status
Submitted
Under Review
Approved

Last updated: January 23, 2026View editorial policy

Personalize

Help us tailor your experience

Which best describes you? Your choice helps us use language that's most understandable for you.

Most Stable BSSO Advancement Fixation Method

For BSSO advancement in young adults and adolescents with Class III malocclusion, use three bicortical positional screws in an inverted-L pattern, as this provides superior biomechanical stability compared to miniplate fixation or hybrid techniques.

Primary Fixation Recommendation

The inverted-L pattern with three bicortical screws demonstrates the highest resistance to both vertical and lateral forces during mandibular advancement. 1 This configuration involves:

  • One bicortical screw placed in the retromolar region
  • Two additional bicortical screws positioned inferiorly in an inverted-L configuration
  • All screws achieving bicortical purchase for maximum stability 1

The biomechanical superiority of this technique has been demonstrated in controlled laboratory testing, where the inverted-L group showed significantly higher resistance (P < .01) to vertical cantilever loading compared to miniplate fixation. 1

Alternative Acceptable Fixation Methods

Both titanium and biodegradable bicortical screws provide equivalent long-term stability for BSSO advancement. 2 If the inverted-L pattern is not feasible due to anatomic constraints:

  • Miniplate with additional bicortical screw (hybrid technique): Adding a single bicortical positional screw in the retromolar region significantly optimizes the resistance of standard miniplate fixation, approaching the stability of the inverted-L pattern for lateral forces. 1

  • Standard miniplate fixation: Four-hole plate with four monocortical screws provides adequate stability but demonstrates the lowest load peak scores compared to bicortical techniques. 1 This method remains acceptable when bicortical fixation is contraindicated.

Clinical Equivalence Data

Multiple clinical studies demonstrate no significant difference in postoperative stability between bicortical screws and miniplate fixation at 6-month follow-up. 3, 4 However, these clinical studies may not capture the biomechanical advantages evident in laboratory testing, particularly under extreme loading conditions. 1

The choice between titanium and biodegradable poly-L-lactic/polyglycolic acid copolymer screws does not affect skeletal stability, with both materials showing equivalent outcomes without wound healing complications. 2

Factors Affecting Stability (Independent of Fixation Method)

Greater advancement magnitude correlates with increased postoperative instability regardless of fixation technique. 3, 4 This positive correlation (P = .0002 to P = .018) means:

  • Advancements exceeding 10mm require more vigilant monitoring
  • Consider adjunctive measures (rigid intermaxillary fixation, extended elastic therapy) for large advancements
  • Patient counseling should address realistic expectations for minor relapse 3, 4

Younger patients demonstrate greater postsurgical relapse. 4 Increasing age associates with smaller amounts of postsurgical change, making fixation choice even more critical in adolescent populations.

Low mandibular plane angle (ML/NSL < 25°) predicts both larger surgical movement and greater postsurgical instability (P = .0008 and P = .0195). 4 These patients benefit most from the superior biomechanical stability of the inverted-L bicortical technique.

Special Considerations for Adolescents

For adolescents approaching skeletal maturity with severe maxillomandibular discrepancy, BSSO advancement with maxillomandibular advancement (MMA) is appropriate when functional impairment exists. 5 The classical procedure consists of bilateral sagittal split ramus osteotomies with rigid internal fixation combined with Le Fort I osteotomy. 6

An advancement of 10-15mm of both maxilla and mandible is necessary to effectively treat associated obstructive sleep apnea when maxillomandibular abnormality exists. 6 This magnitude of advancement makes the inverted-L bicortical fixation pattern particularly important for stability.

Critical Pitfalls to Avoid

  • Underestimating the biomechanical demands: While clinical studies show equivalence between techniques, laboratory data reveals significant differences under loading conditions that may occur during early function. 1

  • Relying solely on miniplate fixation for large advancements: When advancing >7-8mm, strongly consider bicortical techniques or hybrid fixation. 1

  • Ignoring patient-specific risk factors: Low mandibular plane angle and younger age both increase relapse risk independent of fixation method. 4

  • Inadequate bicortical engagement: When using bicortical screws, ensure complete engagement of both cortices; partial engagement negates the biomechanical advantage. 1

Surgery-First Approach Stability

BSSO with rigid internal fixation using the surgery-first approach demonstrates excellent stability with minimal horizontal relapse (<1mm) at 6 months. 7 This validates that proper rigid fixation technique maintains stability even without pre-surgical orthodontic decompensation, though this data primarily applies to setback rather than advancement procedures.

References

Research

An in vitro evaluation of rigid internal fixation techniques for sagittal split ramus osteotomies: advancement surgery.

Journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery : official journal of the American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons, 2009

Research

Skeletal stability after mandibular advancement: a comparison of two rigid internal fixation techniques.

Journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery : official journal of the American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons, 1994

Research

A comparison of skeletal stability after mandibular advancement and use of two rigid internal fixation techniques.

Journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery : official journal of the American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons, 1997

Guideline

Orthognathic Surgery in Adolescents with Severe Maxillomandibular Discrepancy and Airway Obstruction

Praxis Medical Insights: Practical Summaries of Clinical Guidelines, 2025

Guideline

Orthognathic Surgery for OSA with Maxillary and Mandibular Deficiency

Praxis Medical Insights: Practical Summaries of Clinical Guidelines, 2025

Research

Stability After Bilateral Sagittal Split Osteotomy With Rigid Internal Fixation in Surgery-First Approach.

Journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery : official journal of the American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons, 2016

Professional Medical Disclaimer

This information is intended for healthcare professionals. Any medical decision-making should rely on clinical judgment and independently verified information. The content provided herein does not replace professional discretion and should be considered supplementary to established clinical guidelines. Healthcare providers should verify all information against primary literature and current practice standards before application in patient care. Dr.Oracle assumes no liability for clinical decisions based on this content.

Have a follow-up question?

Our Medical A.I. is used by practicing medical doctors at top research institutions around the world. Ask any follow up question and get world-class guideline-backed answers instantly.