Uthirapathy Vignesh1, Divya Mehrotra2, Sujay Milind Bhave3, Praveen K Singh3. 1. Senior Resident, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, King George's Medical University, Lucknow, India. 2. Professor, Department of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery, King George Medical University, Lucknow, India. Electronic address: divyamehrotra@hotmail.com. 3. Junior Resident, Department of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery, King George Medical University, Lucknow, India.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aim of our study was to evaluate the success of distraction osteogenesis in temporomandibular joint (TMJ) ankylosis patients with facial deformities at our maxillofacial unit; assess the psychosocial and well-being outcomes of distraction osteogenesis and its impact on oral health; and discriminate the differences in quality of life (QoL) with application of external or internal devices, unilateral or bilateral, linear or multivector, and maxillomandibular or mandibular distraction. STUDY DESIGN: QoL and the Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP) were prospectively studied in 42 consecutive patients with facial deformities, planned for maxillofacial distraction osteogenesis, using 2 validated questionnaires, the Orthognathic Quality of Life Questionnaire and OHIP-14. Patients who had undergone any previous surgeries were excluded. RESULTS: Among these patients, 16 were female, 26 male; mean age was 14.98 ± 4.88 years, and all had prearthroplastic distraction. The shortening in the mandible was in the proportion 29:01:12 in the body, ramus, and ramus-body, respectively. Mean QoL scores before and after distraction were 68.52 ± 9.50 and 26.62 ± 3.51; and mean OHIP scores before and after distraction were 33.88 ± 6.26 and 15.36 ± 2.54, a highly significant difference (P < .001) suggesting improvement. Significant improvement was identified on all QoL and OHIP questions after distraction (P < .01). The postdistraction overall mean QoL score among patients with extraoral or intraoral distractor did not have a significant difference (P = .32), but facial appearance in the bilateral distraction group; jaw function and overall well-being in the multivector distraction group; and facial appearance, jaw function, and overall well-being in maxillomandibular distraction group had significant improvements (P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: Distraction osteogenesis considerably improves oral health and health-related QoL in patients with TMJ ankylosis with facial deformities. The use of an external or internal distractor did not make any difference in the QoL; however, bilateral distraction, multivector distraction, and maxillomandibular distraction resulted in better QoL outcomes.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of our study was to evaluate the success of distraction osteogenesis in temporomandibular joint (TMJ) ankylosispatients with facial deformities at our maxillofacial unit; assess the psychosocial and well-being outcomes of distraction osteogenesis and its impact on oral health; and discriminate the differences in quality of life (QoL) with application of external or internal devices, unilateral or bilateral, linear or multivector, and maxillomandibular or mandibular distraction. STUDY DESIGN: QoL and the Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP) were prospectively studied in 42 consecutive patients with facial deformities, planned for maxillofacial distraction osteogenesis, using 2 validated questionnaires, the Orthognathic Quality of Life Questionnaire and OHIP-14. Patients who had undergone any previous surgeries were excluded. RESULTS: Among these patients, 16 were female, 26 male; mean age was 14.98 ± 4.88 years, and all had prearthroplastic distraction. The shortening in the mandible was in the proportion 29:01:12 in the body, ramus, and ramus-body, respectively. Mean QoL scores before and after distraction were 68.52 ± 9.50 and 26.62 ± 3.51; and mean OHIP scores before and after distraction were 33.88 ± 6.26 and 15.36 ± 2.54, a highly significant difference (P < .001) suggesting improvement. Significant improvement was identified on all QoL and OHIP questions after distraction (P < .01). The postdistraction overall mean QoL score among patients with extraoral or intraoral distractor did not have a significant difference (P = .32), but facial appearance in the bilateral distraction group; jaw function and overall well-being in the multivector distraction group; and facial appearance, jaw function, and overall well-being in maxillomandibular distraction group had significant improvements (P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: Distraction osteogenesis considerably improves oral health and health-related QoL in patients with TMJ ankylosis with facial deformities. The use of an external or internal distractor did not make any difference in the QoL; however, bilateral distraction, multivector distraction, and maxillomandibular distraction resulted in better QoL outcomes.