Maxillary and Mandibular Displacement in Hemifacial Microsomia: A Longitudinal Roentgen Stereometric Study of 21 Patients with the Aid of Metallic Implants

Sarnäs, Karl-Victor; Rune, Bodil; Åberg, Magnus

doi:10.1597/02-123.1

Cited by 11 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, in milder cases where these structures are present, growth of the affected side can parallel that of the contralateral side. 8 It is postulated that variations in muscle activity and function may contribute to differences in growth. 9,10 In contrast to congenitally acquired forms, mandibular asymmetry more commonly develops postnatally from a variety of potential causes, including inflammatory resorptive changes to the condyle, hyperplastic condylar growth, asymmetry of the cranial base, and trauma.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Some studies have demonstrated progressive deformity with age, 14 whereas others reported significant compensatory growth of the affected side. 8,15,19 Generally, the degree of severity or type of asymmetric morphology has not been shown to correlate with the growth pattern of the maxilla or the mandible. 16,17 Wide interindividual variability in growth patterns has been observed.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…16,17 Wide interindividual variability in growth patterns has been observed. 8,16,17 This heterogeneity in clinical presentation and observed growth patterns in CFM presents a challenge to treatment planning. Consequently, approaches to treatment vary among clinicians.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…13,14,20–22 Others prefer to minimize early surgical intervention and perform definitive correction near the completion of growth. 8,15–17,23 This viewpoint rests on evidence that shows significant growth of the affected side occurring in parallel with the contralateral side. 8,16,17 Clearly.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Congenital and acquired mandibular asymmetry: Mapping growth and remodeling in 3 dimensions

Solem

Ruellas

Miller

et al. 2016

American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction Disordered craniofacial development frequently results in definitive facial asymmetries that can significantly impact a person's social and functional well-being. The mandible plays a prominent role in defining facial symmetry and, as an active region of growth, commonly acquires asymmetric features. Additionally, syndromic mandibular asymmetry characterizes craniofacial microsomia (CFM), the second most prevalent congenital craniofacial anomaly (1:3000 to 1:5000 live births) after cleft lip and palate. We hypothesized that asymmetric rates of mandibular growth occur in the context of syndromic and acquired facial asymmetries. Methods To test this hypothesis, a spherical harmonic-based shape correspondence algorithm was applied to quantify and characterize asymmetries in mandibular growth and remodeling in 3 groups during adolescence. Longitudinal time points were automatically registered, and regions of the condyle and posterior ramus were selected for growth quantification. The first group (n = 9) had a diagnosis of CFM, limited to Pruzansky-Kaban type I or IIA mandibular deformities. The second group (n = 10) consisted of subjects with asymmetric, nonsyndromic dentofacial asymmetry requiring surgical intervention. A control group (n = 10) of symmetric patients was selected for comparison. A linear mixed model was used for the statistical comparison of growth asymmetry between the groups. Results Initial mandibular shape and symmetry displayed distinct signatures in the 3 groups (P < 0.001), with the greatest asymmetries in the condyle and ramus. Similarly, mandibular growth had unique patterns in the groups. The dentofacial asymmetry group was characterized by significant asymmetry in condylar and posterior ramal remodeling with growth (P < 0.001). The CFM group was characterized by asymmetric growth of the posterior ramus (P < 0.001) but relatively symmetric growth of the condyles (P = 0.47). Conclusions Forms of CFM are characterized by active and variable growth of the dysplastic side, which has a distinct pattern from other disorders of mandibular growth.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Congenital and acquired mandibular asymmetry: Mapping growth and remodeling in 3 dimensions

Solem

Ruellas

Miller

et al. 2016

American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In radiographic studies by Rune and associates 15 and Polley and co-workers, 16 it was originally concluded that the degree of mandibular asymmetry remains relatively constant throughout craniofacial development, and this was corroborated by clinical observations. [17][18][19] Based on this theory, correction of the facial deformity is performed after the patient H emifacial microsomia (HFM; Online Mendelian Inheritance in Man [OMIM] 164210) is the most common congenital craniofacial anomaly after cleft lip or palate (or both) and occurs in 1 in every 4000 to 5600 children. 1,2 This congenital condition involves the structures of the first and second branchial arches, with variable clinical dysplasia of both skeletal and soft tissues.…”

Section: Sequence and Controversiesmentioning

confidence: 99%