We present three cases with juvenile ossifying fibroma. Two occurring in the maxilla, and one in the mandible. All three cases presented with a major swelling in the face. After clinical and radiological evaluation the lesions were surgically excised and sent for histopathological evaluation. Two histological types of juvenile ossifying fibroma were found, the psammatous type in two cases and the trabecular pattern in one case. Although juvenile ossifying fibroma is an uncommon clinical entity, its aggressive local behaviour and high recurrence rate mean that it is important to make an early diagnosis. It is also important to apply the appropriate treatment and to follow-up the patient closely over the long term. This report describes the diagnosis and treatment of juvenile ossifying fibroma in the maxilla and the mandible. It also emphasizes the importance of considering the less aggressive options as a first line of treatment before choosing the aggressive approach when dealing with children.

Purpose:The purpose was to report the clinical experience with patients diagnosed with Condylar Hyperplasia (CH).Materials and Methods:Eighteen patients with CH underwent condylar growth assessment using clinical and radiographic examinations. Seven patients with suspected active condyles underwent single photo emission computed tomography (SPECT) examination. A total of patients with asymmetry and malocclusion were treated with orthognathic surgery. Three patients with intact occlusion; underwent inferior border osteotomy with nerve repositioning. All patients were followed up for 3 years without any complications.Conclusion:There is great diversity in the clinical and radiographic presentation in cases with CH. Assessment of condylar growth activity is the cornerstone in managing these cases. After that each case has its own diverse treatment plan to achieve a satisfactory facial symmetry.

No abstract

No abstract

Objectives: We report our experience and the protocol we used in managing maxillary hypoplasia in cleft lip and palate patients. Patients and methods: 14 adult cleft lip and palate patients with maxillary hypoplasia were evaluated clinically. Dental models and radiographs including (lateral cephalograms and orthopantographs) were obtained at the initial visit and upon completion of the presurgical orthodontic treatment. Patients with occlusal discrepancies larger than 6 mm and severe palatal scaring underwent Distraction osteogenesis (DO) to advance the maxilla. Patients with an occlusal discrepancy of 6 mm or less, underwent traditional orthognathic surgery including le fort I advancement and Bilateral sagittal split osteotomy (BSSO) to seat the mandible in occlusion. Results: Five patients underwent orthognathic surgery. Two of them underwent double jaw surgery. Three underwent single jaw conventional le fort l advancement. Four patients required bone grafting to repair the residual alveolar defect and to augment the midface deficiency. Nine patients with severe maxillary hypoplasia underwent maxillary advancement using distraction osteogenesis. Conclusion: Patients with a severe maxillary hypoplasia of 6 mm or more and excessive palatal scaring are successfully treated with DO. Conventional le fort I is reserved for patients with less severe maxillary hypoplasia. Both techniques gave promising results providing having followed the proper selection criteria