Journals / Ondokuz Mayıs Üniv. Diş Hekimliği Derg. / 2006 / Cilt: 7 - Sayı: 1

Craniofacial distraction osteogenesis

Kraniyofasiyal distraksiyon osteogenezi

Pages
55–61
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

This article highlights the indications, contrindications and scientific evolution of the technique; the application to the craniofacial region and surgical techniques.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Distraction osteogenesis is becoming a treatment of choice for reconstruction of craniofacial skeleton.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The successful bone healing occured in the distraction process connected with age, regional blood supply, stabilization of device, latent period and distraction rate and rhythm.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:This article highlights the indications, contrindications and scientific evolution of the technique; the application to the craniofacial region and surgical techniques.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Kemik oluşumu · Alt çene · Üst çene

Abstract

Distraction osteogenesis is becoming a treatment of choice for reconstruction of craniofacial skeleton. Its principle is based on the studies of Gavriel Ilizarov, who applied the technique to the long bones first. This process induces new bone formation along the vector of pull gradually, and also provides expanding the overlying soft tissues simultaneously with bone expantion. The successful bone healing occured in the distraction process connected with age, regional blood supply, stabilization of device, latent period and distraction rate and rhythm. This process eliminates the morbidity of grafting techniques, and increased stability reduces the probability of relapse. However, it provides the advantages of simultaneous soft tissue expantion, decreased operation time and blood loss. Today, distraction of the craniofacial skeleton is performed succesfully, and its indications are being increased. Pleasant outcomes were reported in the mandible, middle face and alveolar regions with distraction osteogenesis. Because it is a new technique in the craniofacial reconstruction, the long term outcomes are required. This article highlights the indications, contrindications and scientific evolution of the technique; the application to the craniofacial region and surgical techniques.

Özet

Distraksiyon osteogenezi kraniyofasial iskelet rekonstrüksiyonu için popüler bir tedavi seçeneği haline gelmiştir. Prensipleri, yöntemi ilk kez uzun kemiklere uygulayan Gavriel Ihzarov'un çalışmalarına dayanır. Yöntem, cerrahi olarak oluşturulan kırıkların kontrollü ve yavaş yavaş yer değiştirmesini içerir ve eş zamanlı olarak çekme vektörü boyunca yumuşak doku ve kemik hacminin artmasıyla sonuçlanır. Distraksiyon prosesi sırasında meydana gelen başarılı kemik oluşumu yaş, bölgesel kanlanma, aperey stabilitesi, latent periyot ve distraksiyonun ritmi ve oranına göre değişir. Bu işlem kemik greftleriyle ilgili morbiditeyi ortadan kaldırır ve artmış stabilite relaps olasılığıalmış operasyon süresi ve kan kaybının azalması gibi avantajları da bulunmaktadır. Günümüzde kraniyofasial iskelet komponentlerinin çoğunun distraksiyonu başarılı bir şekilde yapılmakta ve endikasyonları giderek artmaktadır. Distraksiyon osteogenezi tekniğinin mandibula, orta yüz ve dentoalveoler bölgelerde memnun edici sonuçları bildirilmektedir. Ancak yeni bir teknik olması bakımından uzun dönem sonuçlara ihtiyaç duyulmaktadır. Bu makale tekniğin endikasyonları, kontrendikasyonları ve bilimsel gelişimi ile kraniyofasial bölgeye uygulanması ve operatif teknik üzerinde durmaktadır.

🔖

Cite This Article

ÇELEBİ, N., SUMER, M. (2006). Craniofacial distraction osteogenesis. Ondokuz Mayıs Üniv. Diş Hekimliği Derg., Cilt: 7 - Sayı: 1, 55–61. https://ajindex.com/articles/294361

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (14)

  1. McCarthy JG, Stetnicki " EJ, Mehrara BJ, Longaker MT. Distraction Osteogenesis of the Craniofacial Skeleton. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2001; 107: 1812-27
  2. Mofid MM, Manşon PN, Robertson BC, Tufaro AP, Elias JJ, Vander Kolk CA. Craniofacial Distraction Osteogenesis: A Review of 3278 Cases. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2001; 108:1103-14
  3. Swennen G, Schliephake H, Demmf R, Schierle H, Schierle H, Malevez C. Craniofacial Distraction Osteogenesis: A review of the literature. Part 1: Clinical studies. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2001;30:89-103
  4. Profitt WR, White RP, Sarver DM. Contemporary treatment of dentofacial deformities, Missouri: Mosby Publishing Co., 2002, s. 1-709
  5. Karaharju ST, Karaharju EO, Ranta R. Mandibular Distraction: An Experimental Study on Sheep. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 1990; 18: 280-3
  6. Karaharju EO, Aolto K, Kahri A et al. Distraction Bone Healing. ClinOrthop. 1993; 297:38-43
  7. Tong AC, Yan BS, Chan KC. Use of interdental distraction osteogenesis for orthodontic tooth alignment and correction of maxillary hypoplasia: a case report. Brith J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2003; 41: 185-7
  8. Samchukov M, Cherkashin AM and Cope JB. Craniofacial distraction osteogenesis, Missouri, Mosby Publishing Co, 2001, s; 1-603
  9. Hu J, Zou S, Tang S, Wang D, Li J, Gao Z. Response of schwann cells in the inferior alveolar nerve to distraction osteogenesis: an ultrastructural and immunohistochemical study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2003; 32: 318-24
  10. Farhadieh RD, Nicklin S, Yu Y, Gianoutsos MP, Walsh WR. The Role of Nerve Growth Factor and Brain-Derived Neurotrophic Factor in Inferior Alveolar Nerve Regeneration in Distraction Osteogenesis. J Craniofac Surg. 2003; 14: 859-65
  11. Tüz HH, Kisnisci RS, Günhan Ö. Histomorphometric Evaluation of Short Term Changes in Masseter Muscle After Lenghtening the Rabbit Mandible by Distraction Osteogenesis. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2003; 61: 615-20
  12. Kim S, Park J, Kang D et al. Correlation of Immunohistochemical Characteristics of the Craniomandibular Joint With the Degree of Mandibular Lengthening in Rabbits. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2003; 61: 1189-97
  13. Cho BC, Park JW, Balk BG, Kwon IC, Kim IS. The Role of Hyaluronic Acid, Chitosan, and Calcium Sulfate and Their Combined Effect on Early Bony Consolidation in Distraction Osteogenesis of a Canine Model. J Craniofac Surg. 2002; 13: 783-93
  14. Moore DC, Leblanc CW, Miiller P, Crisco JJ 3rd, Ehrlich MG. Physiologic weight bearing increases new vessel formation du