medigraphic.com
ISSN 2395-9215 (Print)
Órgano Oficial de Difusión de la Facultad de Odontología de la UNAM

2013, Number 1

<< Back Next >>

Rev Mex Ortodon 2013; 1 (1)

Osteogenic mandibular distraction in Nager’s Syndrome. Case report

Prado BNY, Villanueva N, Rincón H

Language: Spanish
References: 30
Page: 45-54
PDF size: 470.93 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Osteogenic distraction is used nowadays for tissuelengtheningdue to the bone formation that occurs during the progressive segment separation after corticotomy, being very useful in dentofacial anomalies, especially in severe hypoplasia. We present the case report of a patient with Nager’s syndrome, acrofacial dysostosis of the preaxial type, severe mandibular hypoplasia and oligodonthia who was treated by means of distraction osteogenesiswith ramus osteotomies to lengthen the mandible. He was treated with a Spring Bite-type orthopaedic appliance after the osteotomies. We conclude that treatment with mandibular distraction should be comprehensive and supported with the use of miofuncional advices.


REFERENCES

  1. Bowen P, Harley F. Mandibulo-facial dysostosis with limb malformations (Nager’s acrofacial dysostosis). Birth Defects Orig Art Ser. 1974; X (5): 109-115.

  2. Zori R, Gray B, Bent-Williams A, Zackowski J. Preaxial acrofacial dysostosis (Nager syndrome) associated with an inherited and apparently balanced X;9 translocation: prenatal and postnatal late replication studies. Am J Med Genet. 1993; 46: 379-383.

  3. Gorlin RJ, Cohen M. Syndromes of the head and neck. 4ta. Ed. OXFORD, University Press; 2001.

  4. Burglen L, Soupre V, Diner M. Dysplasies oto-mandibulaires : génétique et nomenclature des formes syndromiques Ann Chir Plast Esthét. 2001; 46: 400-9.

  5. Herrmann B, Karzon R, Molter D. Otologic and audiologic features of Nager acrofacial dysostosis. International Journal of Pediatric Otorhinolaryngology. 2005; 69: 1053-1059.

  6. Swennen S, Dempf R. Cranio-Facial Distraction Osteogenesis: A review of the literature. Part II Experimental Studies. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2002; 31: 89-103.

  7. Kessler P, Neukama F, Wilfang B. Effects Of Distraction On Bony Regeneration. British J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2005, 43: 392-398.

  8. Milloro M. Peterson’s Principies of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, 2da Ed, Bc Decker Inc; 2004.

  9. Ruiz R, Turvey T, Costello B. Mandibular Distraction Osteogenesis in Children. Oral Maxillofacial Surg Clin N Am. 2005; 17: 475-484.

  10. Sancho MA, Parri F, Rivera F. Elongación ósea progresiva del área máxilo-facial: Distracción mandibular. Cir Pediatr. 2000; 13: 167-169 .

  11. Fuente del Campo A,Castro M, Yudovich M, Distracción osteogénica de la mandíbula. Principios e indicaciones. Rev Hosp Gral Dr. M Gea González Vol 3, No. 1 Enero-Marzo 2000: Págs. 7-12.

  12. Molina F. Combined Maxillary and Mandibular Distraction Osteogenesis. Seminars in Orthodontics, Vol 5, No i (March), 1999: pp 41-45.

  13. Kisnisci R, Fowel S, Epker Bruce N. Distraction osteogenesis in Silver Russell syndrome to expand the mandible. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1999;116:25-30.

  14. Friedrich R., Hermann F. Seven years clinical experience with mandibular distraction in children. Journal of Cranio-Maxillofacial Surgery. 1998; 26: 197-8.

  15. Kevin O’Brien, Jean Wright. Effectiveness of early orthodontic treatment with the Twin-block appliance: A multicenter, randomized, controlled trial. Part 1: Dental and skeletal effects. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2003; 124: 234-43.

  16. Kumar A, Duggal R, Parkashc J. Skeletal and dentoalveolar effects of Twinblock and bionator appliances in the treatment of Class II malocclusion: A comparative study. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2006;130:594-602.

  17. Trenouth J. Ortopedia funcional de los maxilares con el aparato Twin Block (Bloques Gemelos). Ortodoncia Clínica. 2001;4(2):86-93.

  18. Suhr M, Kreusch Th. Technical considerations in distraction osteogenesis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2004; 33: 89–94.

  19. Ulrich M,Kleinheinz J. Biomechanical and Clinical Implications of Distraction Osteogenesis in Craniofacial Surgery. Journal of Cranio-Maxillo-Facial Surgery. 2005; 32: 140-149.

  20. Wiens J, Forte R, Wien J. The use of distraction osteogenesis to treat hemifacial microsomia:A clinical report, J Prosthet Dent. 2003;89:11-4.

  21. GR Swennen, C Euzler, F Schutser. Assement Of the Distraction Regenerate Using Three Dimensional Quantitative Computer Tomography. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2005; 34: 64-73.

  22. Pcer F, Alavanse M, Wangerin H. Distraction Osteogenesis of the Mandible: Evaluation Of Callus Distraction by Scan Ultrasonography. Journal of Cranio-Maxillo- Facial Surgery. 2002; 30: 286-291.

  23. Juson B, Milkhail L. Biomechanics of Mandibular distractor Orientation: An animal Model Analysis, J oral Maxillofacial surg. 1999; 57: 952-962.

  24. Demann E., Haug R, Do posicion And Soft Tissue Affect Distraction Vector? An in Vitro Investigation. J oral Maxillofacial surg. 2002; 60: 149-155.

  25. Proffit WR, Turvey TA, Phillips C. Orthognathic surgery: a hierarchy of stability. Int J Adult Orthod Orthogn Surg .1996;11:191–204.

  26. Converse M, Mc Carthy J. Reconstructive Plastic Surgery, Vol 4, 2Ed, W.B Saunders. N.Y, 1977.

  27. Kaban L, Padwa B, Mulliken J, Surgical correction of Mandibular Hypoplasia in Hemifacial Microsomia. J oral Maxillofacial surg. 1998; 56: 628-638.

  28. Posnik Jc. Surgical Correction Of Mandibular Hypoplasia In Hemifacial Microsomia. J oral Maxillofacial surg. 1998; 56: 639-650.

  29. Svensson B, Feldmann G, Rindler A. Early surgical-orthodontic treatment of the mandibular hypoplasia in juvenile chronic arthritis. Journal of Cranio-Maxillo- Facial Surgery. 1993; 21: 67-75.

  30. Van Strijen PJ, Breuning KH, Becking AG. Cost, operation and hospitalization times in distraction osteogenesis versus sagittal split osteotomy Journal of Cranio-Maxillofacial Surgery. 2003; 31: 42–45.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com