| Literature DB >> 34256849 |
Rongyang Wang1, Shixing Xu2, Ruimei Yang3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Current research about hemifacial microsomia (HFM) patients after distraction osteogenesis (DO) most emphasize the morphologic changes. This case report shows the outcome of DO on the upper airway of a HFM patient with obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) based on the use of computational fluid dynamics (CFD). CASEEntities:
Keywords: Computational fluid dynamics; Distraction osteogenesis; Hemifacial microsomia; Obstructive sleep apnea; Upper airway
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34256849 PMCID: PMC8278579 DOI: 10.1186/s40001-021-00547-1
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Eur J Med Res ISSN: 0949-2321 Impact factor: 2.175
Fig. 1The reconstructed upper airway. a Pre-distraction: I—the choana plane, II—the plane parallel to Frankfort horizontal plane through PNS (posterior nasal spine), III—the minimum cross-sectional area plane, IV—the plane parallel to Frankfort horizontal plane through the superior border of the epiglottis, V—the plane parallel to Frankfort horizontal plane through the most anterior superior edge of the fourth cervical vertebra. b Post-distraction: Lnp—length of the nasopharynx, Lop—length of the oropharynx, Lhp—length of the hypopharynx
Comparison of the PSG tests before and after distraction osteogenesis
| Variables | T0 | T1 |
|---|---|---|
| Age | 11 years and 7 months | 12 years and 1 month |
| BMI (kg/m2) | 21.0 | 20.4 |
| AHI (events/h) | 6.4 | 1.2 |
| LSR (%) | 81 | 95 |
T0, before distraction osteogenesis; T1, after distraction osteogenesis
BMI, body mass index; AHI, apnea–hypopnea index; LSR, lowest blood oxygen saturation
Comparison of the morphological variables before and after distraction osteogenesis
| Variables | T0 | T1 | T1–T0 | Change |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Area (cm2) | ||||
| Plane I | 2.77 | 3.04 | 0.27 | 9.75 |
| Plane II | 1.85 | 4.46 | 2.61 | 141.08 |
| Plane III | 1.38 | 1.95 | 0.57 | 41.30 |
| Plane IV | 2.49 | 2.17 | −0.32 | −12.85 |
| Plane V | 1.94 | 2.26 | 0.32 | 16.49 |
| Length (cm) | ||||
| Lnp | 1.36 | 1.38 | 0.02 | 1.47 |
| Lop | 3.55 | 4.01 | 0.46 | 12.96 |
| Lhp | 1.48 | 1.53 | 0.05 | 3.38 |
| Volume (cm3) | ||||
| Nasal cavity | 18.74 | 20.57 | 1.83 | 9.77 |
| Nasopharynx | 4.48 | 5.85 | 1.37 | 30.58 |
| Oropharynx | 6.13 | 9.13 | 3.00 | 48.94 |
| Hypopharynx | 3.70 | 3.57 | −0.13 | −3.51 |
T0, before distraction osteogenesis; T1, after distraction osteogenesis change: [(T1–T0)/T0] × 100%
Fig. 2Comparison of the aerodynamic variables at the selected cross-sections (I–V). a Average velocity. b Average pressure. c Pressure drop (ΔP)
Fig. 3Comparison of R and νmax in each part of the upper airway. a R: resistance. b νmax: maximum velocity
Fig. 4Comparison between the cross-sections at the superior border of epiglottis. a Post-distraction maxillofacial model indicating the premature contact of the left second primary molar. b Pre-distraction. c Post-distraction