Anatomy of the Craniofacial Region

Hardt, N; Kuttenberger, Johannes

doi:10.1007/978-3-540-33041-7_1

Cited by 3 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Sicher and Tandler clearly distinguished between pillars and buttresses, however many (but not all, Manson et al, ) authors use the term “buttress” imprecisely and inaccurately to refer to vertical pillars as well as horizontal buttresses (Linnau et al, ; Hardt and Kuttenberger, ; Pollock, ; Smith and Nesi, 2012). The distinction is more than terminological: pillars are oriented predominantly parallel to applied loads, and thereby resist external forces generating compressive stresses, whereas buttresses are oriented perpendicular to pillars, and resist lateral thrust that might cause failure of a pillar due to bending or buckling.…”

Section: Terminology Text Boxmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Review of In Vivo Bone Strain Studies and Finite Element Models of the Zygomatic Complex in Humans and Nonhuman Primates: Implications for Clinical Research and Practice

Prado

Freire

Rossi

et al. 2016

The Anatomical Record

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The craniofacial skeleton is often described in the clinical literature as being comprised of vertical bony pillars, which transmit forces from the toothrow to the neurocranium as axial compressive stresses, reinforced transversely by buttresses. Here, we review the literature on bony microarchitecture, in vivo bone strain, and finite-element modeling of the facial skeleton of humans and nonhuman primates to address questions regarding the structural and functional existence of facial pillars and buttresses. Available bone material properties data do not support the existence of pillars and buttresses in humans or Sapajus apella. Deformation regimes in the zygomatic complex emphasize bending and shear, therefore conceptualizing the zygomatic complex of humans or nonhuman primates as a pillar obscures its patterns of stress, strain, and deformation. Human fossil relatives and chimpanzees exhibit strain regimes corroborating the existence of a canine-frontal pillar, but the notion of a zygomatic pillar has no support. The emerging consensus on patterns of strain and deformation in finite element models (FEMs) of the human facial skeleton corroborates hypotheses in the clinical literature regarding zygomatic complex function, and provide new insights into patterns of failure of titanium and resorbable plates in experimental studies. It is suggested that the "pillar and buttress" model of human craniofacial skeleton function be replaced with FEMs that more accurately and precisely represent in vivo function, and which can serve as the basis for future This article includes AR WOW Videos. Video 1 can be viewed at http://bcove.me/2mla49wp, Video 2 can be viewed at

show abstract

Section: Terminology Text Boxmentioning

confidence: 99%

“… From Hardt and Kuttenberger, , Chapter 1, Anatomy of the Craniofacial Region, in Craniofacial Trauma: Diagnosis and Management pp 3‐13, Springer. Reproduced with permission from Springer.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Review of In Vivo Bone Strain Studies and Finite Element Models of the Zygomatic Complex in Humans and Nonhuman Primates: Implications for Clinical Research and Practice

Prado

Freire

Rossi

et al. 2016

The Anatomical Record

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The third major force line draws from the distal maxillary molars via the maxillary tuberosity and the pterygoid massif to the skull base [ 16 ], [ 17 ]. The transversal trajectories of the midface are formed by the supraorbital and infraorbital bone margins and the alveolar process of the maxilla [ 18 ].…”

Section: Basics Of Traumatology Of the Midfacementioning

confidence: 99%

“…The individual approach depends on the underlying fracture: a transoral approach, transconjunctival incisions, an intranasal approach, or a transcutaneous approaches may be appropriate [ 13 ], [ 18 ] (Figure 3 (Fig. 3) ).…”

Section: Basics Of Traumatology Of the Midfacementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Afterwards, the treatment starts in the superior level in reference to the skull base and to intact bone structures, the fragments are repositioned and fixed with mini-plates. Then the reposition continues one level more inferior (“top down” procedure) [ 13 ], [ 18 ], [ 54 ]. By means of this procedure, an outer frame of the midface consisting of the zygomatico-frontal transition, the zygomatic bones, and the zygomatico-maxillary transition is established in first place [ 13 ].…”

Section: Basics Of Traumatology Of the Midfacementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation