Distraction of the Midface and the Zygoma

Fairley, Jeffrey; Mühlbauer, W.; Anderl, Hans

doi:10.1007/978-1-4612-2140-1_13

Cited by 3 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Since no osteotomy of the zygomatic arches and pterygomaxillary disjunction is performed, the midface is left untouched in this procedure. Nine of these 13 patients underwent a midface distraction additionally, as described elsewhere [8]. A fronto‐orbital‐facial advancement was performed in 9 patients, one of them underwent an additional midface distraction.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Genotype–phenotype analysis in Apert syndrome suggests opposite effects of the two recurrent mutations on syndactyly and outcome of craniofacial surgery

et al. 2000

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Apert syndrome is an autosomal dominant condition characterized by craniosynostosis and severe syndactyly, caused by two recurrent mutations in the fibroblast growth factor receptor 2 gene (FGFR2). The genotype-phenotype correlations of 21 patients with Apert syndrome were analysed as to the craniofacial appearance following surgery and the degree of syndactlyly. The craniofacial appearance following craniofacial surgery was better in patients with the P253R mutation, whereas these patients showed a more pronounced severity of the syndactyly.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Genotype–phenotype analysis in Apert syndrome suggests opposite effects of the two recurrent mutations on syndactyly and outcome of craniofacial surgery

et al. 2000

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…[5][6][7][8][9]15 The apparatus of external distraction usually consists of two main parts: an external framework, either rigid or moveable, and a dental arch appliance. There are several problems with this kind of technique.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This technique was confirmed by Rachmiel et al 4 in 1993 and soon followed by clinical applications. [5][6][7][8][9] Currently, there are three kinds of techniques of maxillary and midfacial osteotomy distraction: (1) internal distraction techniques, 5,7,8 (2) technique of tooth-borne face mask protraction, 7,9 and (3) technique of tooth-borne rigid external distraction. 6 In 1995, Staffenberg et al 10 reported experimental protraction of midfacial skeleton without osteotomy (ie, the technique of sutural distraction osteogenesis [SDO]).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Sutural Distraction Osteogenesis (SDO) Versus Osteotomy Distraction Osteogenesis (ODO) for Midfacial Advancement: A New Technique and Primary Clinical Report

Liu¹,

Hou²,

Liu³

et al. 2005

Journal of Craniofacial Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A new technique of osteotomy distraction osteogenesis (ODO) and sutural distraction osteogenesis (SDO) by the use of bone-borne traction hooks is presented. The technique of osteotomy plus distraction osteogenesis is suitable for adult patients. The technique of sutural distraction osteogenesis is suitable for young patients, ages 6 through 12 years. The distraction system consists of a face-bow, orthodontic elastics, and bone-borne traction hooks. The bone-borne traction hooks are made of titanium, with two traction hooks running laterally or downwardly. When a Le Fort III osteotomy is needed, bone-borne traction hooks are inserted through the nostrils into a bone hole drilled at the lateral-inferior pyriform aperture. When no osteotomy is needed, only the bone-borne traction hooks are placed. Heavy elastics were used in the technique of osteotomy distraction osteogenesis for Le Fort III osteotomy adult patients, whereas light forces and thus light elastics were used for younger patients. Three adult patients and four children were treated by osteotomy distraction and sutural distraction, respectively. All seven patients with midfacial hypoplasia established a harmonious facial profile and normal occlusal relationships. Radiographic examination showed balanced advancement of the midfacial skeleton. It is suggested that the treatment of midfacial hypoplasia in children by the technique of sutural distraction osteogenesis is to be preferred because of its simplicity and relative noninvasiveness. Thus, the authors suggest that midfacial hypoplasia should be treated at a younger age by this technique, potentially eliminating the need for a Le Fort III osteotomy at an older age.

show abstract

Osteogenic distraction in the face

Bennett

Sidman

2002

Facial Plastic Surgery Clinics of North America

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Distraction of the Midface and the Zygoma

Cited by 3 publications

References 22 publications

Genotype–phenotype analysis in Apert syndrome suggests opposite effects of the two recurrent mutations on syndactyly and outcome of craniofacial surgery

Genotype–phenotype analysis in Apert syndrome suggests opposite effects of the two recurrent mutations on syndactyly and outcome of craniofacial surgery

Sutural Distraction Osteogenesis (SDO) Versus Osteotomy Distraction Osteogenesis (ODO) for Midfacial Advancement: A New Technique and Primary Clinical Report

Osteogenic distraction in the face

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About