• Maxillofacial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery
• /
• v.31 no.1
• /
• pp.53-60
• /
• 2009

Maxillary deficiency, anterior cross bite, constriction of maxillary arch, malaligned teeth are frequently observed in patients with cleft lip and palate. Surgery and orthodontics, combined intervention are needed to correct maxillary deficiency. Distraction osteogenesis that currently used has many advantages like less relapse tendency, more advancement of maxilla, capable in growing patients. In case 1, 18 years old girl with BCLP had severe midfacial deficiency and multiple missing of teeth. LeFort I osteotomy, followed by maxillary distraction osteogenesis utilizing rigid external distraction device(RED) system, was performed. After a 6-day latency period, distraction proceeded at a rate of 1mm per day (at 1st week, 1.5mm/day). Total advancement was 19mm. The RED device left in place for the additional 4 weeks for consolidation. After the RED device was removed, face mask was applied with elastic traction for 5 weeks. After achieving acceptable facial appearance and occlusion, orthodontic appliance was removed. The results after 4 years follow-up was sustained pretty well without aggravation of velopharyngeal function. In case 2, 22 years old man with UCLP had severe midfacial deficiency and palatally erupted upper 2nd premolars due to arch length discrepancy, but the anterior segment of maxillary did not show constriction and crowding. patient had no arch width discrepancy, crowding was concentrated on premolar region. Segmental LeFort I osteotomy was performed. After a 6 - day latency period, using internal distraction device, distraction proceeded at a 0.5mm per day(at 1st week, 0.75 - 1 mm/day). Total advancement was 15mm. After internal distraction device was removed, face mask was applied with elastic traction for 4 weeks. After surgical-orthodontic treatment, facial appearance and occlusion was improved pretty good, and after 46 months follow-up the result was retained well.

• Maxillofacial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery
• /
• v.31 no.4
• /
• pp.325-329
• /
• 2009

Objective : This is to report the effectiveness of intraoral distraction osteogenesis, iliac bone graft for alveolar augmentation in the extremely atrophied alveolar defects after infected allobone grafted area. Subjects and Methods : Anterior segmental osteotomy was performed and the trans-oral alveolar distractors (Martin, Germany) were applied in patient with the severe acquired anterior mandibular and mandibular defect after ameloblastoma enucleation. Iliac bone grafts were performed in defect sites and distraction osteogenesis were treated. After latent period for 1 week, the osteomized alveolar segments were distracted by 0.75 mm a day (0.25 mm/1 turn) for 10 days The consolidation period was about 12 weeks. Thereafter, 2 titanium threaded implants were simultaneously installed with removal of distractor. For oral rehabilitiation, The implants were installed in maxilla, mandible. It was tested with clinically and radiographically. Results : Amounts of acquired alveolar bone were 10 mm with the increased width of the ridge crests and soft tissue expansion. Dental implants installated on the augmented alveolar ridges in 12 weeks after distraction were confirmed as in good osseointegration and in good function without any complications. Conclusion : Intraoral distraction osteogenesis can be a good option for alveolar ridge augmentation of the severely atrophied ridges and soft-tissue defects.

• Maxillofacial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery
• /
• v.28 no.3
• /
• pp.242-246
• /
• 2006

Objective : This is to report the criteria of success of intraoral distraction osteogenesis for alveolar augmentation in the severely atrophied alveolar defects through clinical result of 2 cases. Subjects and Methods : Anterior segmental osteotomy was performed and alveolar distractors (Martin and Leibinger, Germany) were applied each in 2 patients with severely defected anterior maxillary area. The osteomized alveolar segments were distracted by 1mm a day after latency period. After the consolidation period implants were installed with removal of distractor. The implants were evaluated clinically and radiographically. Results : In Case I, the distracted bone was directed to the palatal side, and another augmentation treatment - block bone graft, guided bone regeneration - was needed. In Case II, the successful alveolar bone augmentation was achieved. Dental implant was placed on distracted alveolar bone, and showed good osseointegration and good function without any complication. Conclusion : Distraction osteogenesis can be a good choice for alveolar ridge augmentation of severely atrophied ridges. However, the anterior esthetic prosthetics relies on the control of the vector, the kind of distractor, the healing capacity of patient and the etiology of atrophy. Therefore another study of each category would be needed.