Literature DB >> 16920536

Long-term maxillomandibular skeletal and dental changes in children with cleft lip and palate after maxillary distraction.

Kiyoshi Harada1, Masaru Sato, Ken Omura.   

Abstract

Long-term skeletal and dental changes were examined in 8 children with cleft lip and palate who underwent maxillary distraction to allow the maxilla to catch up to their mandibular growth at the treatment point. Changes in the overjet (OJ), overbite (OB), and positions of the anterior nasal spine (ANS), upper incisors (U1), pogonion (Pog), and lower incisors (L1) were measured on preoperative to 36 months postoperative lateral-cephalograms. In most of the children, the long-term changes after the maxillary distraction resulted in an inferior growth of the maxilla and anteroinferior growth of the mandible. This seems to suggest that maxillary distraction performed during childhood needs considerable overcorrection. However, if the maxilla is distracted to an adult position during childhood, the masticatory functions of the children will markedly deteriorate until their jaws grow. Therefore, we believe that one goal of maxillary distraction during childhood can be to allow the maxilla to catch up to the mandibular growth of the children at the treatment point.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16920536     DOI: 10.1016/j.tripleo.2005.09.019

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod        ISSN: 1079-2104


  6 in total

1.  Le fort I maxillary advancement using distraction osteogenesis.

Authors:  Patrick D Combs; Raymond J Harshbarger
Journal:  Semin Plast Surg       Date:  2014-11       Impact factor: 2.314

2.  Orthodontic considerations for maxillary distraction osteogenesis in growing patients with cleft lip and palate using internal distractors.

Authors:  Adriana da Silveira; Pollyana Marques de Moura; Raymond J Harshbarger
Journal:  Semin Plast Surg       Date:  2014-11       Impact factor: 2.314

Review 3.  Long-term skeletal stability after maxillary advancement with distraction osteogenesis in cleft lip and palate patients.

Authors:  Humam Saltaji; Michael P Major; Mostafa Altalibi; Mohamed Youssef; Carlos Flores-Mir
Journal:  Angle Orthod       Date:  2012-04-12       Impact factor: 2.079

4.  Biomechanical comparison of two intraoperative mobilization techniques for maxillary distraction osteogenesis: Down-fracture versus non-down-fracture.

Authors:  Lili Yang; Eduardo Yugo Suzuki; Boonsiva Suzuki
Journal:  Ann Maxillofac Surg       Date:  2014 Jul-Dec

5.  A Comparative Study of Skeletal and Dental Outcome between Transcutaneous External Maxillary Distraction Osteogenesis and Conventional Rigid External Device in Treating Cleft Lip and Palate Patients.

Authors:  Chi-Yu Tsai; Yi-Hao Lee; Te-Ju Wu; Shiu-Shiung Lin; Jui-Pin Lai; Yu-Jen Chang
Journal:  J Pers Med       Date:  2022-06-29

6.  Treatment outcome and long-term stability of skeletal changes following maxillary distraction in adult subjects of cleft lip and palate.

Authors:  Satinder Pal Singh; Ashok Kumar Jena; Vidya Rattan; Ashok Kumar Utreja
Journal:  Contemp Clin Dent       Date:  2012-04
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.