Mohammed E Elsalanty1, Veera Malavia2, Ibrahim Zakhary3, Timothy Mulone4, Elias D Kontogiorgos5, Paul C Dechow6, Lynne A Opperman6. 1. Associate Professor, Department of Oral Biology and Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, College of Dental Medicine, Georgia Regents University, Augusta, GA. Electronic address: melsalanty@gru.edu. 2. Formerly, Graduate Student, Center for Craniofacial Research and Diagnosis (CCRD), Department of Biomedical Sciences, Texas A&M University Baylor College of Dentistry, Dallas, TX; currently, Nova Southeastern University College of Dental Medicine, Fort Lauderdale-Davie, FL. 3. Formerly, Senior Research Associate, Department of Oral Biology, College of Dental Medicine, Georgia Regents University, Augusta, GA; currently, Assistant Professor, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, University of Detroit Mercy School of Dentistry, Detroit, MI. 4. Owner, Craniotech ACR Devices, LLC, Dallas, TX. 5. Associate Professor, Center for Craniofacial Research and Diagnosis (CCRD), Department of Restorative Sciences, Texas A&M University Baylor College of Dentistry, Dallas, TX. 6. Professor, Center for Craniofacial Research and Diagnosis (CCRD), Department of Biomedical Sciences; Director, Technology Development, Texas A&M University Baylor College of Dentistry, Dallas, TX.
Abstract
PURPOSE: This study tested the use of a dentate transport segment for the reconstruction of a large U-shaped defect in the anterior segment of the canine mandible using a novel curved reconstruction plate. The quality and quantity of bone regenerate formed by dentate versus edentulous transport segments were compared. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In 5 adult foxhound dogs, a defect of 70 to 75 mm was created in the canine mandible by excising the mandible anterior to the right and left fourth premolars. Reconstruction was performed by trifocal distraction osteogenesis using a bone transport reconstruction plate (BTRP-02), with 2 transport units being activated simultaneously, one on either side of the defect, 1 dentate and 1 edentulous. Bilateral distraction proceeded at a rate of 1 mm/day until the segments docked against each other in the midline. After 39 to 44 days of consolidation, the animals were euthanized. The quantity and quality of bone regeneration on the 2 sides were compared using micro-computed tomography. RESULTS: The defect reconstruction was successful. The amount and quality of bone formed by the transport segments were similar on the 2 sides. There were no major differences in the bone volume fraction and density of the regenerate bone formed by the 2 transport segments. The bone volume fraction and density of the regenerate bone were considerably lower than those of the host bone in the distal segments, likely owing to the short consolidation period. CONCLUSIONS: Bone transport remains a viable option in reconstructing anterior segmental defects in the mandible. The use of dentate or edentulous transport segments for reconstruction provides options for the surgeon in often highly compromised patients requiring these surgeries.
PURPOSE:This study tested the use of a dentate transport segment for the reconstruction of a large U-shaped defect in the anterior segment of the canine mandible using a novel curved reconstruction plate. The quality and quantity of bone regenerate formed by dentate versus edentulous transport segments were compared. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In 5 adult foxhound dogs, a defect of 70 to 75 mm was created in the canine mandible by excising the mandible anterior to the right and left fourth premolars. Reconstruction was performed by trifocal distraction osteogenesis using a bone transport reconstruction plate (BTRP-02), with 2 transport units being activated simultaneously, one on either side of the defect, 1 dentate and 1 edentulous. Bilateral distraction proceeded at a rate of 1 mm/day until the segments docked against each other in the midline. After 39 to 44 days of consolidation, the animals were euthanized. The quantity and quality of bone regeneration on the 2 sides were compared using micro-computed tomography. RESULTS:The defect reconstruction was successful. The amount and quality of bone formed by the transport segments were similar on the 2 sides. There were no major differences in the bone volume fraction and density of the regenerate bone formed by the 2 transport segments. The bone volume fraction and density of the regenerate bone were considerably lower than those of the host bone in the distal segments, likely owing to the short consolidation period. CONCLUSIONS: Bone transport remains a viable option in reconstructing anterior segmental defects in the mandible. The use of dentate or edentulous transport segments for reconstruction provides options for the surgeon in often highly compromised patients requiring these surgeries.
Authors: M Del Santo; C A Guerrero; P H Buschang; J D English; M L Samchukov; W H Bell Journal: Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop Date: 2000-11 Impact factor: 2.650
Authors: A F Ayoub; W Richardson; D Koppel; H Thompson; M Lucas; T Schwarz; L Smith; J Boyd Journal: Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg Date: 2001-10 Impact factor: 1.651
Authors: Ivo Agabiti; Paolo Capparè; Enrico Felice Gherlone; Carmen Mortellaro; Giovanni B Bruschi; Roberto Crespi Journal: J Craniofac Surg Date: 2014-05 Impact factor: 1.046
Authors: Mohammed E Elsalanty; Ibrahim Zakhary; Sara Akeel; Byron Benson; Timothy Mulone; Gilbert R Triplett; Lynne A Opperman Journal: Ann Plast Surg Date: 2009-10 Impact factor: 1.539