medigraphic.com
ISSN 2007-3178 (Print)
Asociación Mexicana de Cirugía Bucal y Maxilofacial, Colegio Mexicano de Cirugía Bucal y Maxilofacial, A.C.

2016, Number 2

<< Back Next >>

Rev Mex Cir Bucal Maxilofac 2016; 12 (2)

Alveolar bone transport in lip and cleft palate

Flores GRA, Hernández CJR, Muruaga LA

Language: Spanish
References: 15
Page: 57-62
PDF size: 1245.37 Kb.


ABSTRACT

The closure of a wide fistulae or alveolar cleft in patients with CLP sequelae are a challenge in the mutual management of the orthodontist and the surgeon. This is because of the difficult in accomplish a complete closure due to the need of soft tissue expansion and the big volume of bone graft required. Patients with CLP sequelae with the necessity of a late secondary bone graft, that is to say patients older than 12 years of age, have as feature, loss of osseous support of the teeth adjacent to the cleft, besides of the morbidity increase. This article proposes the alveolar bone transport, promoting an osteoconduction zone in the alveolar cleft across the segment transported, with its consequent soft tissue expansion in patients with wide alveolar cleft and complete secondary dentition. In this method of bone transportation, the bone is distracted to the defect direction, through a bone osteotomy adjacent to the defect, having as advantage of this method the simultaneous distraction of the adjacent soft tissue.


REFERENCES

  1. Saulacic N, Iizuka T, Martin MS, Garcia AG. Alveolar distraction osteogenesis: a systematic review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2008; 37 (1): 1-7.

  2. Apaydin A, Yazdirduyev B, Can T, Keklikoglu N. Soft tissue changes during distraction osteogenesis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2011; 40 (4): 408-412.

  3. Snyder CC, Levine GA, Swanson HM, Browne EZ Jr. Mandibular lengthening by gradual distraction. Preliminary report. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1973; 51 (5): 506-508.

  4. Ilizarov GA. The tension-stress effect on the genesis and growth of tissues. Part I. The influence of stability of fixation and soft-tissue preservation. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1989; (238): 249-281.

  5. Ilizarov GA. The tension-stress effect on the genesis and growth of tissues: Part II. The influence of the rate and frequency of distraction. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1989; (239): 263-285.

  6. McCarthy GJ. Principles of craniofacial distraction. Ch. 12 Grabb and Smith’s Plastic Surgery. 2007.

  7. Block MS, Chang A, Crawford C. Mandibular alveolar ridge augmentation in the dog using distraction osteogenesis. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1996; 54 (3): 309-314.

  8. Liou EJ, Chen PK, Huang CS, Chen YR. Interdental distraction osteogenesis and rapid orthodontic tooth movement: a novel approach to approximate a wide alveolar cleft or bony defect. 56th Annual Meeting of the American Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Association, Scottsdale Arizona April 1999.

  9. Guerrero CA. Intraoral bone transport in clefting. Oral Maxillofac Surg Clin North Am. 2002; 14 (4): 509-523.

  10. Mitsugi M, Ito O, Alcalde RE. Maxillary bone transportation in alveolar cleft-transport distraction osteogenesis for treatment of alveolar cleft repair. Br J Plast Surg. 2005; 58 (5): 619-625.

  11. Drew SJ. Clinical controversies in oral and maxillofacial surgery: part one. Maxillary distraction osteogenesis for advancement in cleft patients, internal devices. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2008; 66 (12): 2592-2597.

  12. Bell WH, Epker BN. Surgical-orthodontic expansion of the maxilla. Am J Orthod. 1976; 70 (5): 517-528.

  13. McCarthy JG, Schreiber J, Karp N, Thorne CH, Grayson BH. Lengthening the human mandible by gradual distraction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1992; 89 (1): 1-8; discussion 9-10.

  14. Smith SW, Sachdeva RC, Cope JB. Evaluation of the consolidation period during osteodistraction using computed tomography. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1999; 116 (3): 254-263.

  15. Bell WH, Guerrero CA. Distraction osteogenesis of the facial skeleton. Ch. 45: Alveolar distraction for height and width. 2007.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com