Literature DB >> 17223309

Mandibular symphyseal distraction osteogenesis: review of three techniques.

A Alkan1, M Ozer, B Baş, M Bayram, N Celebi, S Inal, B Ozden.   

Abstract

Mandibular symphyseal distraction osteogenesis (MSDO) is an alternative strategy to correct mandibular transverse deficiencies and dental crowding. Only a limited number of practitioners have reported their clinical experience and potential complications of this procedure to widen the mandible in a large case series. This study involved retrospective analysis of 40 patients who underwent mandibular symphyseal distraction osteogenesis. Three different types of distractor were used to widen the mandible: tooth-borne in 21 patients, bone-borne in 5 patients and hybrid (both bone and tooth-borne) in 14 patients. The distraction amount ranged from 7 to 11 mm (mean 7.31 mm). While 39 patients underwent successful mandibular symphyseal distraction, there was one failure. Most of the complications were experienced in bone-borne distractors, such as breakage of the distractor rod, gingival recession, secondary infection and ptosis of the chin. In the light of these findings, it is suggested that a lingually placed tooth-borne hyrax appliance is more suitable and reliable than the other distraction devices. Further larger studies are needed in order to better evaluate the effectiveness of bone-borne or hybrid devices.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17223309     DOI: 10.1016/j.ijom.2006.11.005

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg        ISSN: 0901-5027            Impact factor:   2.789


  6 in total

Review 1.  Biomechanical configurations of mandibular transport distraction osteogenesis devices.

Authors:  Uriel Zapata; Mohammed E Elsalanty; Paul C Dechow; Lynne A Opperman
Journal:  Tissue Eng Part B Rev       Date:  2010-06       Impact factor: 6.389

2.  Effects of a hinged expansion screw for median mandibular distraction treatment on the lower first molars regarding tooth inclination and intermolar transverse distance.

Authors:  Alfred Peter Muchitsch; Heinz Winsauer; Brigitte Wendl; Margit Pichelmayer; Elma Kuljuh; Marie Therese Navysany; Markus Muchitsch
Journal:  J Orofac Orthop       Date:  2014-01-19       Impact factor: 1.938

3.  Current Practice for Transverse Mandibular and Maxillary Discrepancies in the Netherlands: A Web-Based Survey Among Orthodontists and Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons.

Authors:  Atilla Gül; Stephen T H Tjoa; Jan P de Gijt; Justin T van der Tas; Hadi Sutedja; Eppo B Wolvius; Karel G H van der Wal; Maarten J Koudstaal
Journal:  Craniomaxillofac Trauma Reconstr       Date:  2021-06-24

Review 4.  Mandibular Midline Distraction Osteogenesis with a Bone-borne, Tooth-borne or Hybrid Distraction Appliance: a Systematic Review.

Authors:  Thomas Starch-Jensen; Annette Dalgaard Kjellerup; Tue Lindberg Blæhr
Journal:  J Oral Maxillofac Res       Date:  2018-09-30

5.  Skeletal and dental effects of tooth-borne versus hybrid devices for mandibular symphyseal distraction osteogenesis.

Authors:  Julia A Niculescu; John W King; Steven J Lindauer
Journal:  Angle Orthod       Date:  2013-06-20       Impact factor: 2.079

6.  Maxillomandibular Transverse Osteodistraction: A Multidisciplinary Case Report with 30-Month Follow-Up.

Authors:  G Turatti; A Bruni; M Savoini; M Giordano; G Gerbino
Journal:  Case Rep Dent       Date:  2020-01-31
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.