Literature DB >> 9514327

Maxillary distraction: aesthetic and functional benefits in cleft lip-palate and prognathic patients during mixed dentition.

F Molina1, F Ortiz Monasterio, M de la Paz Aguilar, J Barrera.   

Abstract

In the last few years, distraction techniques have been used successfully to correct the hypoplastic human mandible. In patients with cleft lip and palate, normal growth of the maxilla may be impaired by early cleft repair, and many of them do not respond to orthodontic procedures alone. Maxillary distraction is an alternative technique to correct maxillary hypoplasia during mixed dentition. In the last 3 years, the procedure was performed in 38 patients aged between 6 and 12 years; 18 patients had unilateral cleft lip and palate, 9 patients had bilateral cleft lip and palate, 7 patients had unilateral cleft palate, 2 patients had prognathism, and 2 patients had nasomaxillary dysplasia. Photographs, posteroanterior and lateral cephalograms, and dental models are obtained preoperatively (as well as an orthopantomogram) to locate the tooth buds. A subperiosteal dissection is performed exposing the anterior and lateral aspects of the maxilla, and an incomplete horizontal osteotomy is done above the tooth buds. Using a facial mask and an intraoral fixed appliance system as an anchorage, we initiate on the fifth postoperative day the application of distraction forces. Maxillary advancement between 4 and 12 mm is achieved during 3 to 4 weeks, and a satisfactory class I or II molar relationship is also obtained. A combination of forward and downward distraction forces can be used to achieve simultaneous advancement and elongation of the hypoplasic maxilla. The aesthetic results are excellent, and the nasolabial angle is increased, including a more anterior projection of the upper lip. Nasal breathing is improved as well as the air flow and patency of the nasal airway. Velopharyngeal function remains unchanged after the procedure. The follow-up in this series varied from 6 months to 3 years. No relapses have been observed.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9514327     DOI: 10.1097/00006534-199804040-00010

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg        ISSN: 0032-1052            Impact factor:   4.730


  17 in total

1.  Le fort I maxillary advancement using distraction osteogenesis.

Authors:  Patrick D Combs; Raymond J Harshbarger
Journal:  Semin Plast Surg       Date:  2014-11       Impact factor: 2.314

2.  An interview with Alvaro Alfredo Figueroa.

Authors:  Alvaro Alfredo Figueroa; Eduardo Franzotti Sant'Anna; Mônica Tirre de Souza Araujo; Geórgia Wain Thi Lau; Lúcio Henrique E G Maia
Journal:  Dental Press J Orthod       Date:  2015 Jul-Aug

3.  Anterior Segmental Distraction Osteogenesis in the Hypoplastic Cleft Maxilla: Report of five cases.

Authors:  Sruthi Rao Janardhan; S M Kotrashetti; J B Lingaraj; P X Pinto; K M Keluskar; Siddharth Jain; Piyush Sone; Santhosh Rao
Journal:  Sultan Qaboos Univ Med J       Date:  2013-06-25

4.  Maxillary distraction osteogenesis at Le Fort-I level induces bone apposition at infraorbital rim.

Authors:  Vidya Rattan; Ashok Kumar Jena; Satinder Pal Singh; Ashok Kumar Utreja
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2013-11-26       Impact factor: 3.573

5.  Rapid maxillary expansion compared to surgery for assistance in maxillary face mask protraction.

Authors:  Nazan Küçükkeleş; Sirin Nevzatoğlu; Tamer Koldaş
Journal:  Angle Orthod       Date:  2011-01       Impact factor: 2.079

6.  Success rate of miniplate anchorage for bone anchored maxillary protraction.

Authors:  Eline E B De Clerck; Gwen R J Swennen
Journal:  Angle Orthod       Date:  2011-06-30       Impact factor: 2.079

7.  Biomechanical comparison of two intraoperative mobilization techniques for maxillary distraction osteogenesis: Down-fracture versus non-down-fracture.

Authors:  Lili Yang; Eduardo Yugo Suzuki; Boonsiva Suzuki
Journal:  Ann Maxillofac Surg       Date:  2014 Jul-Dec

Review 8.  Outcomes of Maxillary Orthognathic Surgery in Patients with Cleft Lip and Palate: A Literature Review.

Authors:  Tulika Ganoo; Mats Sjöström
Journal:  J Maxillofac Oral Surg       Date:  2019-03-30

9.  Biomechanical evaluation of sagittal maxillary internal distraction osteogenesis in unilateral cleft lip and palate patient and noncleft patients: a three-dimensional finite element analysis.

Authors:  Sultan Olmez; Servet Dogan; Mahmut Pekedis; Hasan Yildiz
Journal:  Angle Orthod       Date:  2014-02-19       Impact factor: 2.079

10.  Long-term results of surgically assisted maxillary protraction vs regular facemask.

Authors:  Sirin Nevzatoğlu; Nazan Küçükkeleş
Journal:  Angle Orthod       Date:  2014-03-21       Impact factor: 2.079

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.