Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery
Volume 64, Issue 12 , Pages 1715-1720, December 2006

The Use of Internal Maxillary Distraction for Maxillary Hypoplasia: A Preliminary Report

  • Joseph E. Van Sickels, DDS

      Affiliations

    • Professor and Division Chief, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, College of Dentistry, Chandler Medical Center, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY.
    • Corresponding Author InformationAddress correspondence and reprint requests to Dr Van Sickels: Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, College of Dentistry, Chandler Medical Center, University of Kentucky F-512, Lexington, KY 40536-0297
  • ,
  • Mathew J. Madsen, BS

      Affiliations

    • Dental Student, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, College of Dentistry, Chandler Medical Center, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY.
  • ,
  • Larry L. Cunningham Jr, DDS, MD

      Affiliations

    • Associate Professor and Director of Residency Education, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, College of Dentistry, Chandler Medical Center, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY.
  • ,
  • Douglas Bird, DDS

      Affiliations

    • Resident, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, College of Dentistry, Chandler Medical Center, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY.

Purpose

Distraction osteogenesis is a useful alternative to advance the maxilla in complicated cases of maxillary hypoplasia. The purpose of this article is to review the workup, experience, and preliminary results with the use of internal distraction osteogenesis for maxillary hypoplasia at one teaching institution.

Patients and Materials

Over a 5-year period, more than 300 patients with craniofacial and dentofacial defects have undergone oral and maxillofacial surgery at our center to correct their skeletal discrepancies. Of these, 10 have had maxillary distraction osteogenesis done with internal distractors. Follow-up of 6 months or more was available for 8 patients. Stereolithographic models were used to bend distractors prior to surgery in 6 patients.

Results

Latency prior to the start of distraction was 3 to 7 days and varied with the age of the patient. Distraction occurred at approximately 1 mm per day with an average distraction length of 8.5 mm (range, 6-10 mm). Excellent occlusal results were obtained in 5 patients. Major complications including nonunion and failure to achieve acceptable occlusal results were observed in 3 patients. Minor complications including pain and loosening of the distracter devices were observed in 2 patients, but did not appear to affect the esthetic and functional results.

Conclusions

Distraction osteogenesis is a useful alternative to traditional orthognathic surgery to treat maxillary hypoplasia. Internal distractions are attractive to patients, but are more difficult to place and can cause discomfort to patients when trying to achieve an ideal primary vector of distraction. Stereolithographic models can help with placement of the device. Changes in design of distractors may help with patient discomfort.

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

PII: S0278-2391(06)01612-0

doi:10.1016/j.joms.2006.07.013

Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery
Volume 64, Issue 12 , Pages 1715-1720, December 2006