Advertisement

Distraction osteogenesis of the maxilla and midface using a subcutaneous device: report of four cases

      This paper is only available as a PDF. To read, Please Download here.

      Abstract

      The use of distraction osteogenesis in the hypoplastic maxilla and midface is still controversial. Since the beginning of 1998, 25 patients have been treated with osteodistraction techniques for various reasons. Among them were four patients who were treated by high LeFort I osteotomies and insertion of a newly developed subcutaneous distraction device in the malar region. Distraction osteogenesis was successful in all four cases resulting in a mean sagittal bone gain of 12.0 mm (range 7–14) at the level of distractor fixation. All patients were kept under orthodontic supervision during osteodistraction. The final occlusal relation was satisfactory. Cephalometric measurements after distraction showed an anterior rotational movement of the midface region. As the question of relapse and further growth is still not clear, Delaire masks are used to stabilize the surgical result after removal of the distractor. The importance of long-term follow-up is stressed.
      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to British Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

      References

        • McCarthy JG
        • Schreiber J
        • Karp N
        Lengthening the human mandible by gradual distraction.
        Plast Reconstr Surg. 1992; 89: 1-8
        • Stucki-McCormick SU
        • Mizrahi RD
        • Fox RM
        • Romo T
        Distraction osteogenesis of the mandible using a submergedintraoral device: a report of three cases.
        J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1999; 57: 192-198
        • Molina F
        • Ortiz-Monasterio F
        Mandibular elongation andremodeling by distraction: a farewell to major osteotomies.
        Plast Reconstr Surg. 1995; 96: 825-840
        • Kessler P
        • Wiltfang J
        • Schultze-Mosgau S
        • Merten HA
        • Neukam FW
        Distraction osteogenesis in complex syndromal disease. 2nd International Congress on Cranial and Facial Bone Distraction Processes. Monduzzi Editore, Bologna1999 (p. 107–111)
      1. Klein, C, Potentials and limitations of distraction osteogenesis in the craniofacial skeleton. 2nd International Congress on Cranial and Facial Bone Distraction Processes, Bologna, Monduzzi Editore, 1999, 281, 289

      2. Wiltfang, J, Kessler, P, Schultze-Mosgau, S, Merten, H, A, Günther, G, Continuous bone distraction with the help of a microhydraulic cylinder. 2nd International Congress on Cranial and Facial Bone Distraction Processes, Bologna, Monduzzi Editore, 1999, 35, 4

        • Cohen SR
        • Burstein FC
        • Stewart MB
        • Rathburn MA
        Maxillary-midface distraction in children with cleft lip and palate: a preliminary report.
        Plast Reconstr Surg. 1997; 99: 1421-1428
        • Reinert S
        • Roser M
        • Cornelius CP
        • Bacher M
        • Krimmel M
        Distraction osteogenesis of the maxilla – additionally oralternatively to Le Fort-osteotomies. 2nd International Congress on Cranial and Facial Bone Distraction Processes. Monduzzi Editore, Bologna1999 (p. 181–186)
        • Ilizarov GA
        The principles of the Ilizarov method.
        Bull Hosp Jt Dis. 1997; 56: 49-53
        • Polley JW
        • Figueroa AA
        Management of severe maxillarydeficiency in childhood and adolescence through distractionosteogenesis with an external, adjustable, rigid distraction device.
        J Craniofac Surg. 1997; 8: 181-185
        • Chin M
        • Toth BA
        Distraction osteogenesis in maxillofacial surgery using internal devices: review of five cases.
        J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1996; 54: 45-53
      3. Bell, W, H, Modern practice in orthognathic and reconstructive surgery, Vol 3. Philadelphia, WB Saunders, 1992

        • Welch RD
        • Birch JG
        • Makarov MR
        • Samchukov ML
        Histomorphometry of distraction osteogenesis in a caprinetibial lengthening model.
        J Bone Miner Res. 1998; 13: 1-9
        • Roth DA
        • Gosain AK
        • McCarthy JG
        • Stracher MA
        • Lefton DR
        • Grayson BH
        A CT scan technique for quantitative volumetric assessment of the mandible after distraction osteogenesis.
        Plast Reconstr Surg. 1997; 99: 1237-1247
        • Cohen SR
        • Rutrick RE
        • Burstein FD
        Distraction osteogenesisof the human craniofacial skeleton: initial experience with anew distraction system.
        J Craniofac Surg. 1995; 6: 368-374
        • Aronson J
        Experimental and clinical experience with distraction osteogenesis.
        Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 1994; 31: 473-481
        • Chin M
        • Toth BA
        Le Fort III advancement with gradualdistraction using internal devices.
        Plast Reconstr Surg. 1997; 100: 819-830
        • Bell WH
        • Gonzalez M
        • Samchukov ML
        • Guerrero CA
        Intraoral widening and lengthening of the mandible in baboons bydistraction osteogenesis.
        J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1999; 57: 548-562
        • Meyer U
        • Wiesmann HP
        • Kruse-Losler B
        • Handschel J
        • Stratmann U
        • Joos J
        Strain-related bone remodeling indistraction osteogenesiss of the mandible.
        Plast ReconstrSurg. 1999; 103: 800-807
        • Rachmiel A
        • Levy M
        • Laufer D
        Lengthening of the mandible by distraction osteogenesis: report of cases.
        J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1995; 53: 838-846
      4. Albanese, M, Nocini, P, F, Wangerin, K, Histological examination of osteogenetic tissue obtained one year after distraction of the mandible. 2nd International Congress on Cranial and FacialBone Distraction Processes, Bologna, Monduzzi Editore, 1999, 29, 3

        • Hoffmeister B
        • Marks C
        • Wolff KD
        Floating bone concept in mandibular distraction.
        Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1999; 28: 90
        • Cope JB
        • Samchukov ML
        • Cherkashin AM
        • Wolford LM
        • Franco PF
        Biomechanics of mandibular distractor orientation: an animal model analysis.
        J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1999; 57: 952-962

      Linked Article