Literature DB >> 23499159

Automated continuous distraction osteogenesis may allow faster distraction rates: a preliminary study.

Zachary S Peacock1, Brad J Tricomi, Brian A Murphy, John C Magill, Leonard B Kaban, Maria J Troulis.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To determine if automated continuous distraction osteogenesis (DO) at rates faster than 1 mm/day results in bone formation by clinical and radiographic criteria, in a minipig model.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: An automated, continuous, curvilinear distraction device was placed across a mandibular osteotomy in 10 minipigs. After 12 mm of distraction and 24 days of fixation, the animals were sacrificed and bone healing was evaluated. The continuous distraction rates were 1.5 mm/day (n = 5) and 3 mm/day (n = 5). A semiquantitative scale was used to assess the ex vivo clinical appearance of the distraction gap (3 = osteotomy not visible; 2 = <50% visible; 1 = >50% visible; 0 = 100% visible), stability (3 = no mobility; 2 and 1 = mobility in 1 plane or 2 planes, respectively; 0 = mobility in 3 planes), and radiographic density (4 = 100% of gap opaque; 3 = >75%; 2 = 50% to 75%; 1 = <50%; 0 = radiolucent). Groups of 4 minipigs distracted discontinuously at 1, 2, and 4 mm/day served as controls.
RESULTS: Automated, continuous DO at 1.5-mm/day and 3-mm/day had similar bone formation compared to discontinuous DO at 1-mm/day. The continuous DO 1.5-mm/day group had significantly higher scores for appearance and radiographic density compared with the discontinuous 4-mm/day group. The continuous DO 3-mm/day group had significantly higher scores for appearance and radiographic density compared with the discontinuous 4-mm/day group and greater stability compared with the discontinuous 2- and 4-mm/day groups.
CONCLUSIONS: Results of this preliminary study indicate that continuous DO at rates of 1.5 and 3.0 mm/day produces better bone formation compared with discontinuous DO at rates faster than 1 mm/day.
Copyright © 2013 American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23499159      PMCID: PMC3660410          DOI: 10.1016/j.joms.2012.11.015

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Oral Maxillofac Surg        ISSN: 0278-2391            Impact factor:   1.895


  43 in total

1.  Evaluation of a semiburied, fixed-trajectory, curvilinear, distraction device in an animal model.

Authors:  E B Seldin; M J Troulis; L B Kaban
Journal:  J Oral Maxillofac Surg       Date:  1999-12       Impact factor: 1.895

2.  A new distraction device to compare continuous and discontinuous bone distraction in mini-pigs: a preliminary report.

Authors:  P Kessler; J Wiltfang; F W Neukam
Journal:  J Craniomaxillofac Surg       Date:  2000-02       Impact factor: 2.078

3.  Dietary consistency and craniofacial development related to masticatory function in minipigs.

Authors:  R L Ciochon; R A Nisbett; R S Corruccini
Journal:  J Craniofac Genet Dev Biol       Date:  1997 Apr-Jun

4.  Spring-mediated mandibular distraction osteogenesis.

Authors:  Mehrdad M Mofid; Nozomu Inoue; Anthony P Tufaro; Craig A Vander Kolk; Paul N Manson
Journal:  J Craniofac Surg       Date:  2003-09       Impact factor: 1.046

5.  Continuous mandibular distraction osteogenesis using superelastic shape memory alloy (SMA).

Authors:  S Idelsohn; J Peña; D Lacroix; J A Planell; F J Gil; A Arcas
Journal:  J Mater Sci Mater Med       Date:  2004-04       Impact factor: 3.896

6.  Complications of mandibular distraction osteogenesis.

Authors:  Maria J Troulis; Leonard B Kaban
Journal:  Oral Maxillofac Surg Clin North Am       Date:  2003-05       Impact factor: 2.802

7.  The principles of the Ilizarov method.

Authors:  G A Ilizarov
Journal:  Bull Hosp Jt Dis Orthop Inst       Date:  1988

8.  The tension-stress effect on the genesis and growth of tissues: Part II. The influence of the rate and frequency of distraction.

Authors:  G A Ilizarov
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  1989-02       Impact factor: 4.176

9.  Calcium-restricted ovariectomized Sinclair S-1 minipigs: an animal model of osteopenia and trabecular plate perforation.

Authors:  L Mosekilde; S E Weisbrode; J A Safron; H F Stills; M L Jankowsky; D C Ebert; C C Danielsen; C H Sogaard; A F Franks; M L Stevens
Journal:  Bone       Date:  1993 May-Jun       Impact factor: 4.398

10.  Automating skeletal expansion: An implant for distraction osteogenesis of the mandible.

Authors:  John C Magill; Marten F Byl; Batya Goldwaser; Maria Papadaki; Roger Kromann; Brent Yates; Joseph R Morency; Leonard B Kaban; Maria J Troulis
Journal:  J Med Device       Date:  2009-03       Impact factor: 0.582

View more
  4 in total

1.  Skeletal and soft tissue response to automated, continuous, curvilinear distraction osteogenesis.

Authors:  Zachary S Peacock; Brad J Tricomi; Matthew E Lawler; William C Faquin; John C Magill; Brian A Murphy; Leonard B Kaban; Maria J Troulis
Journal:  J Oral Maxillofac Surg       Date:  2014-01-16       Impact factor: 1.895

2.  Assessment of the OsteoMark-Navigation System for Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery.

Authors:  Zachary S Peacock; John C Magill; Brad J Tricomi; Brian A Murphy; Vladimir Nikonovskiy; Nobuhiko Hata; Laurent Chauvin; Maria J Troulis
Journal:  J Oral Maxillofac Surg       Date:  2015-03-19       Impact factor: 1.895

3.  Bilateral Continuous Automated Distraction Osteogenesis: Proof of Principle.

Authors:  Zachary S Peacock; Brad J Tricomi; William C Faquin; John C Magill; Brian A Murphy; Leonard B Kaban; Maria J Troulis
Journal:  J Craniofac Surg       Date:  2015-11       Impact factor: 1.046

Review 4.  Review of automatic continuous distraction osteogenesis devices for mandibular reconstruction applications.

Authors:  Shahrokh Hatefi; Katayoun Hatefi; Francis Le Roux; Javad Alizargar; Zeinolabedin Behdadipour; Yimesker Yihun; Khaled Abou-El-Hossein
Journal:  Biomed Eng Online       Date:  2020-04-01       Impact factor: 2.819

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.