Distraction osteogenesis of mandible: our experience at RIMS, Ranchi
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18203/issn.2454-5929.ijohns20260792Keywords:
Distraction osteogenesis, Mandibular hypoplasia, TMJ ankylosisAbstract
Distraction osteogenesis has become an important modality in management of craniofacial deformities particularly in mandibular hypoplasia. This article describes extraoral distraction osteogenesis of mandible in management of mandibular deformities in 08 cases. Majority of patients presenting with mandibular deformities were secondary to TMJ ankylosis with a history of trauma. Body of mandible was primarily involved in 63% patients while in 37% patient’s ramus of mandible was involved. Bilateral distraction device placement was done in 05 (62%) cases and unilateral distraction device placed in 03 (38%) cases. Sliding genioplasty was performed additionally in severe mandibular hypoplasia (37.5% cases) to achieve a good profile. 63% patients were satisfied with the improved facial features both frontal and profile with functional harmonious occlusion noted while 37% patients were not satisfied as there was not significant improvement in facial symmetry. Distraction osteogenesis is a valuable tool for mandibular reconstruction, though individualized planning and careful execution are critical to minimize complications and optimize results. Multidisciplinary approach plays a key role in patient management and satisfaction assessment.
Metrics
References
McCarthy JG, Schreiber J, Karp N, Thorne CH, Grayson BH. Lengthening the human mandible by gradual distraction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1992;89(1):1-8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/00006534-199289010-00001
Ilizarov GA. The tension-stress effect on the genesis and growth of tissues. Part I: The influence of stability of fixation and soft-tissue preservation. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1989;(238):249-81. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/00003086-198901000-00038
Molina F, Ortiz Monasterio F. Mandibular elongation and remodeling by distraction: a farewell to major osteotomies. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1995;96(4):825-42. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/00006534-199509001-00010
Swennen GRJ, Schliephake H, Dempf R, Schierle H, Malevez C. Craniofacial distraction osteogenesis: a review of the literature. Part 1: clinical studies. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2001;30(2):89-103. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1054/ijom.2000.0033
Cohen SR, MacLean J, Werdman MJ. Distraction osteogenesis of the human craniofacial skeleton: initial experience with a new distraction system. J Craniofac Surg. 1995;6(5):368-74. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/00001665-199509000-00007
Chin M, Toth BA. Distraction osteogenesis in maxillofacial surgery using internal devices: review of five cases. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1996;54(1):45-53. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0278-2391(96)90303-1
Codivilla A. On the means of lengthening in the lower limbs, the muscles and tissues which are shortened through deformity. Am J Orthop Surg. 1905;2:353-69.
Snyder CC, Levine GA, Swanson HM, Browne EZ Jr. Mandibular lengthening by gradual distraction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1973;51(5):506-8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/00006534-197305000-00003
Meazzini MC, Mazzoleni F, Bozzetti A. Distraction osteogenesis in pediatric craniofacial deformities: indications and outcomes. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2014;42(6):e123-9.
Denny AD, Kalantarian B. Mandibular distraction osteogenesis in very young children: a retrospective study of 12 cases. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2002;109(3):822-9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/00006534-200203000-00011
Bouchard C, Troulis MJ, Kaban LB. Distraction osteogenesis of the mandible: a comparison of bone graft versus no bone graft. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2002;60(8):879-83.
Menon S, Manerikar R, Roy SK, Chowdhury, Murali Mohan S. Distraction osteogenesis in management of mandibular deformities. Ann Maxillofac Surg. 2016;6(2):209-13.
McCarthy JG, Stelnicki EJ, Grayson BH. Distraction osteogenesis of the mandible: a ten-year experience. Semin Orthod. 1999;5(1):3-8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S1073-8746(99)80037-1