Maxillary distraction osteogenesis versus orthognathic surgery for cleft lip and palate patients

Kloukos, Dimitrios; Fudalej, Piotr; Sequeira‐Byron, Patrick; Katsaros, Christos

doi:10.1002/14651858.cd010403.pub3

Cited by 38 publications

(43 citation statements)

References 52 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Patients with greater PD are at greater risk for development of VPI post-surgically. 8,10 In the present study, both LSP and PD dimensions showed a significant increase following RED at T2. However, pre-surgical LSP and PD dimensions were not significantly associated with development of VPI at T2.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 55%

“…1,8,9 Recent Cochrane review concluded that the evidence comparing effectiveness of DO and conventional orthognathic surgery is of very low quality and further prospective studies with a larger sample size are required to confirm possible true differences between both interventions. 10 Literature is not consistent on the effect of MA on VPI and contradicting evidence has been reported. Therefore, this retrospective study was conducted to evaluate the same.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Literature suggests that among many factors which influence post-treatment VPI in patients with repaired cleft, the most important are amount of MA, presence of pre-treatment VPI, pre-treatment LSP, and pre-surgical pharyngeal depth (PD). [8][9][10] Studies have shown that RED provides better adaptation and stability of soft tissues with reduced chances of VPI post treatment by virtue of distraction histiogenesis. But other studies have concluded deterioration of velopharyngeal function even after RED and a positive correlation has been observed between the amount of MA and increase in VPI.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Pre-treatment Factors Affecting Post-treatment Velopharyngeal Incompetency in Patients with Unilateral Cleft Lip and Palate Treated with Maxillary Rigid External Distraction

Agarwal

Londhe

Mitra

et al. 2020

J Indian Orthod Soc

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: Maxillary advancement (MA) with rigid external distraction (RED) to correct mid-face deficiency in adult cases with cleft lip and palate (CLP) may trigger velopharyngeal incompetency (VPI) post-surgically. Aim and objectives: To determine pre-treatment factors affecting worsening of post-surgical VPI in patients with repaired unilateral CLP who underwent MA with RED. Material and methods: Treatment records of 10 patients with unilateral CLP who underwent MA with RED were selected from institutional archives. All patients underwent clinical evaluation of velopharyngeal function at T1 (1 week before surgery) and T2 (3 months after surgery). Based on post-surgical VPI status, patients were divided into 2 groups: group 1 (no change in VPI) and group 2 (worsened VPI). Lateral cephalograms were manually traced at T1 and T2 to determine the changes in length of soft palate (LSP) and pharyngeal depth (PD) at T2. The information regarding amount of MA and presence of pre-surgical VPI was obtained from case sheets of patients. Results: Mean LSP and PD at T2 were higher compared to T1 ( p-value < .001). No significant difference was observed in mean pre-surgical age, gender, pre-surgical LSP, and pre-surgical PD between the study groups ( p-value > .05 for all). The worsened VPI post-surgically was significantly associated with the presence of VPI pre-surgically and also with the amount of MA ( p-value < .05 for both). Conclusions: Amount of MA and presence of pre-surgical VPI are most important factors affecting post-surgical VPI. Prospective studies are recommended to validate the findings of this study.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 55%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Pre-treatment Factors Affecting Post-treatment Velopharyngeal Incompetency in Patients with Unilateral Cleft Lip and Palate Treated with Maxillary Rigid External Distraction

Agarwal

Londhe

Mitra

et al. 2020

J Indian Orthod Soc

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Orthognathic surgery in evolving and there are many reports on the use of distraction osteogenesis as a part of treatment, particularly when the necessary surgical movements are beyond the limits of conventional orthognthic surgery [33,34,35,36]. We did not identify cases that only underwent distraction osteogenesis without further orthognathic surgery.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Orthognathic Surgery Treatment Need in a Turkish Adult Population: A Retrospective Study

Olkun

Borzabadi‐Farahani

Uçkan

2019

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: Limited information exists on orthognathic procedures and respective dentofacial deformities in Turkey. This retrospective study assessed the orthognathic surgery procedures in two universities, using the Index of Orthognathic Functional Treatment Need (IOFTN), and compared the IOFTN grades according to gender as well as sagittal and vertical skeletal relationships. Material and Methods: Records of 200 consecutive patients (120 females, 80 males, mean age = 23.4 (SD: 5.4) years) who received orthognathic treatment (2014–2018) were analyzed. Sagittal (ANB angle) and vertical skeletal type (GoGnSN angle), osteotomies, and IOFTN scores were recorded. Results: Class III, II, and I malocclusions formed 69%, 17.5%, and 13.5% of the samples, respectively. Class III skeletal relationships (69%) and high-angle cases (64%) were the most prevalent (p < 0.05). IOFTN scores were unevenly distributed among genders (p < 0.05) and the prevalent scores were 5.3 (40.5%), 4.3 (15.5%), 5.4 (13%), and 5.2 (7.5%), with 94% scoring 4 or 5 (great and very great functional need). Bimaxillary osteotomies were the most prevalent (55%), followed by LeFort I (32%), and 26% had genioplasty. Conclusion: IOFTN is a reliable tool to identify patients in need of orthognathic surgery. Class III malocclusions and Class III sagittal skeletal relationships were more common in this sample. Comparatively, a higher number of patients had genioplasty as a part of their treatment.

show abstract

“…En cuanto a la etiología, existe consenso respecto a su naturaleza multifactorial, existiendo predisposición genética e influencia ambiental. Dentro de los factores de riesgo descritos en la literatura, podemos encontrar el consumo de cigarro y/o alcohol, el uso de drogas anti epilépticas o corticoesteroides administrados de forma tópica o sistémica, inadecuada nutrición de la madre durante el embarazo y bajo nivel socioeconómico 3 .…”

Section: Introductionunclassified

Distracción osteogénica maxilar con distractor rígido externo en pacientes con fisura labio-palatina. Revisión bibliográfica

Leiva-Villagra

Ayala-Jiménez

Stange-Dempster

et al. 2019

Odontol. sanmarquina

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

La fisura labio-palatina es la malformación congénita más común entre las anomalías craneofaciales y causa una serie de alteraciones a nivel funcional, fisiológico, estético y social. Una de las características comúnmente asociada a estos pacientes, es la hipoplasia maxilar severa producto de la gran resistencia opuesta por los tejidos cicatrizales de labio y paladar, como consecuencia de la cirugía primaria. Tradicionalmente, el tratamiento ha sido la cirugía ortognática convencional al término del crecimiento, sin embargo, este enfoque ha demostrado tener ciertas limitaciones. La distracción osteogénica mediante un distractor rígido externo ha resultado ser una buena alternativa para el manejo de estos pacientes, ya que permite la distracción gradual del maxilar y de los tejidos asociados, mejorando los resultados a corto y largo plazo. Se realizó una revisión de la literatura actual disponible con el objetivo de describir el alcance del tratamiento de la distracción osteogénica maxilar con distractor rígido externo en los pacientes con fisura labio-palatina e hipoplasia maxilar severa. Se concluye que la distracción osteogénica maxilar con distractor rígido externo es un procedimiento efectivo, confiable y relativamente estable, con mínimas complicaciones asociadas y que podría superar a la cirugía convencional en el manejo de pacientes que requieran un avance maxilar severo.

show abstract

Maxillary distraction osteogenesis versus orthognathic surgery for cleft lip and palate patients

Abstract: Maxillary distraction osteogenesis versus orthognathic surgery for cleft lip and palate patients.

Cited by 38 publications

References 52 publications

Pre-treatment Factors Affecting Post-treatment Velopharyngeal Incompetency in Patients with Unilateral Cleft Lip and Palate Treated with Maxillary Rigid External Distraction

Pre-treatment Factors Affecting Post-treatment Velopharyngeal Incompetency in Patients with Unilateral Cleft Lip and Palate Treated with Maxillary Rigid External Distraction

Orthognathic Surgery Treatment Need in a Turkish Adult Population: A Retrospective Study

Distracción osteogénica maxilar con distractor rígido externo en pacientes con fisura labio-palatina. Revisión bibliográfica

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About