OBJECTIVE: Premaxillary distraction osteogenesis was introduced using intraoral devices to correct maxillary hypoplasia and lengthen the alveolar bone horizontally in a patient with unilateral cleft lip and palate. METHODS: For premaxillary distraction osteogenesis, Le Fort I osteotomy was performed. Vertical osteotomy lines were located distally of the upper right canine and left first premolar to separate the anterior segment of the maxilla. After a 7-day latency period, distraction was allowed to continue for 20 days at a rate of 0.5 mm/d, followed by a 3-month consolidation period. After consolidation, orthodontic treatment and bilateral intraoral vertical ramus osteotomy were performed for the mandibular setback. The implant and prosthodontic treatments were applied to the alveolar ridge area created by the distraction osteogenesis. RESULTS: The A-point moved 8.0 mm forward during the distraction osteogenesis period, and the recurrence rate was 25% after the retention period. The transverse dimension of the upper arch was expanded during orthodontic treatment. The quality of the alveolar bone created by distraction osteogenesis was acceptable for the prosthodontic implant. CONCLUSIONS: Premaxillary distraction osteogenesis and arch expansion is an effective treatment strategy, improving function, aesthetics, and stability for cleft patients with multiple missing teeth.
OBJECTIVE: Premaxillary distraction osteogenesis was introduced using intraoral devices to correct maxillary hypoplasia and lengthen the alveolar bone horizontally in a patient with unilateral cleft lip and palate. METHODS: For premaxillary distraction osteogenesis, Le Fort I osteotomy was performed. Vertical osteotomy lines were located distally of the upper right canine and left first premolar to separate the anterior segment of the maxilla. After a 7-day latency period, distraction was allowed to continue for 20 days at a rate of 0.5 mm/d, followed by a 3-month consolidation period. After consolidation, orthodontic treatment and bilateral intraoral vertical ramus osteotomy were performed for the mandibular setback. The implant and prosthodontic treatments were applied to the alveolar ridge area created by the distraction osteogenesis. RESULTS: The A-point moved 8.0 mm forward during the distraction osteogenesis period, and the recurrence rate was 25% after the retention period. The transverse dimension of the upper arch was expanded during orthodontic treatment. The quality of the alveolar bone created by distraction osteogenesis was acceptable for the prosthodontic implant. CONCLUSIONS: Premaxillary distraction osteogenesis and arch expansion is an effective treatment strategy, improving function, aesthetics, and stability for cleftpatients with multiple missing teeth.
Entities:
Keywords:
cleft palate and lip; dental implants; distraction osteogenesis; skeletal class III