medigraphic.com
ISSN 1870-199X (Print)
Órgano oficial de la Facultad de Odontología, UNAM

2006, Number 4

<< Back Next >>

Rev Odont Mex 2006; 10 (4)

Orthodontic surgical treatment of hemifacial microsmia using intraoral mandibular ramus bone elongation technique

Calderón CL, Miranda VE, Rubio BP

Language: Spanish
References: 27
Page: 151-156
PDF size: 169.94 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Dentofacial deformities have increased in frequency in oral and maxillofacial surgeons practice. This group of deformities are related with bone and dental structures in any of three spacial planes: vertical. sagital and tranverse or a combination of all them. Mandibular hypoplasia is one of the most common problems dentists have to face. Complexity arises when the asymmetry becomes more evident as patient grows, with laterognatia and chin deviation, cross bite and posterior open bite; these problems are counteracted by an occlusal plane deviation, resulting in functional and esthetic abnormalities. Bone elongation in hypoplasic mandibles is a technique that produces notable changes in bone as well as soft and vascular tissues in a brief period of time, without the need of complex surgical procedures; allowing treatment at its early stages. This paper presents 9 cases of facial asymmetry due to hemifacial microsomia treated by osteogenic elongation of mandibular ramus. Clinical features and pictures, simple cranial views (posteroanterior and lateral), panoramic view and computerized tomography with three-dimensional scan were evaluated. All cases were treated by mandibular ramus osteogenic elongation under general anesthesia, with favorable esthetic and functional outcomes, resulting in stable occlusion and facial symmetry, with minimum complications such as temporomandibular pain, temporary chin paresthesia, posterior open bite and anterior cross bite. Compensatory maxillary growth was noted, being necessary pre and postsurgical orthodontic treatment. All cases were successful, having control follow ups from 6 months to 2 years. No recurrence or other complications were present.


REFERENCES

  1. David DJ, Mahatumarat Ch. Hemifacial microsomia: A multisystem classification. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery 1987; 80(4):.

  2. McCarthy JG, Stelnicfi EJ, et al. Distraction osteogenesis of the mandible: a ten year experience. Semin Orthod, 1999; 5: 3-8.

  3. Murrey JE, Kaban L. Analysis and treatment of hemifacial microsomia. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery 1984; 74(2):.

  4. Díaz GFJ, Rubio BP. Distracción mandibular. Hospital Universitario de “La Princesa” Madrid España, 2002.

  5. Bell WH. Modern practice in orthognathic and reconstructive surgery. Management of skeletal and occlusal deformities of hemifacial microsomia. 1985; 2: 1369-1379.

  6. Fonseca RJ. Oral and maxillofacial surgery. 1st. W.B. Saunders Company. Philadelphia 2000; 6: 45-53.

  7. Sanchukov M. Craniofacial distraction osteogenesis. Ed Mosby St. Louis Missouri 2001.

  8. Kaban LB, Padwa B. Surgical correction of mandibular hypoplasia hemifacial microsomia: The case for treatment in early childhood. J Oral Maxillofacial Surg 1998; 56: 628-638.

  9. MC Carthy JG. The role of distraction osteogenesis in the reconstruction of the mandible in unilateral craniofacial microsomia. Clinics in Plastic Surgery 1994; 21(4): 625-631.

  10. Losken HW et al. Planning mandibular distraction: Preliminary report. Cleft Palate Craniofacial J 1995; 32(1): 71.

  11. Rubio BP et al. Intraoral mandibular distraction osteogenesis: Special attention to the treatment planning. J Craniomaxillofacial Surg 2001; 29: 254-262.

  12. Kaban LB, Padwa BL, Mulliken JB. Surgical correction of mandibular hypoplasia in hemifacial microsomia. J Oral Maxillofacial Surg 1998; 56: 628.

  13. Polley JW, Figueroa AA, Klon et al. Longitudinal analysis of mandibular asymmetry in hemifacial microsomia. Plast Reconstr Surg 1997; 99: 328.

  14. Rubio BP et al. Distraction osteogenesis of the ascending ramus for mandibular hypoplasia using external or internal devices, a report 8 cases. J Oral Maxillofacial Surg 2000; 58; 593-599.

  15. Covaliere CM, Blach MA. Mandibular distraction in abscense of ascending ramus and condole. J Craniofacial Surg 2002; 13(4): 527-532.

  16. Polley JW, Figueroa AA. Distraction osteogenesis to application in severs mandibular deformations in HFM. J Craniofacial Surg 1997; 8(5): 422-430.

  17. Rubio B et al. Experimental mandibular regeneration by distraction with submerged devices preliminary results of canine model. J Craniofacial Surg 2002; 13(2): 224-230.

  18. Karaharju-Suvanto et al. Distraction osteogenesis of mandible. J Oral Maxillofacial Surg 1992; 21: 118-121.

  19. Klein C, Howaldt HT. Mandibular distraction osteogenesis and first lever treatment of severe disgnatic in childhood. J Orofac Orthop 1996; 57: 46.

  20. Ortiz M, Molina F. Simultaneous mandibular and maxillary distraction in hemifacial microsomia. Plast Reconstructive Surg 1997; 100: 852.

  21. Mc Carthy. The role of distraction osteogenesis in the reconstructive of the mandible in HFM. Clin Plast Surg 1994; 21: 625.

  22. Kusnoto B, Figueroa AA, Polley. A longitudinal tree-dimensional evaluation of the growth patient HFM. J Craniofac Surg 1999; 10: 480-486.

  23. Rubio P, Padron A, Villa E. Avances en distracción mandibular. Indicaciones, planificación y resultados. Rev Esp Cirug Oral y Maxilofacial 1999; 21(3): 119-126.

  24. Politi M. The floating technique of vertical ramus in hemifacial microsomia: Case report. Int Adult Orthod Orthognath Surg 2002; 17: 3.

  25. Posnick JC. Surgical correction of mandibular hypoplasia in hemifacial microsomia: A personal perspective. Oral Maxillofacial Surg 1998; 56: 639-650.

  26. Mommaerts MY. Is early osteodistraction a solution for the ascending ramus compartment in hemifacial microsomia? A literature study. J of Cranio Maxillofacial Surgery (2002). 2002; 30: 201-207.

  27. Rachmiel A, Manor R. Intraoral distraction osteogenesis of the mandible in hemifacial microsomia. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2001; 59: 728-733.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com