Download PDF
Informationen aus Orthodontie & Kieferorthopädie 2011; 43(03): 161-165
DOI: 10.1055/s-0031-1286328
Übersichtsartikel
© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Distraktionsosteogenese des Oberkiefers – Indikation und Anwendung extraoraler Systeme

Distraction Osteogenesis of the Maxilla – Indication and Use of External Devices
T. Hierl
1   Klinik und Poliklinik für Mund-, Kiefer- und Plastische Gesichtschirurgie, Universitätsklinikum Leipzig AöR
,
A. Hemprich
1   Klinik und Poliklinik für Mund-, Kiefer- und Plastische Gesichtschirurgie, Universitätsklinikum Leipzig AöR
,
K.-F Krey
2   Selbstständige Abteilung für Kieferorthopädie, Universitätsklinikum Leipzig AöR
,
H. Hümpfner-Hierl
1   Klinik und Poliklinik für Mund-, Kiefer- und Plastische Gesichtschirurgie, Universitätsklinikum Leipzig AöR
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
18 October 2011 (online)

Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Zusammenfassung

Die Distraktionsosteogenese des Oberkiefers stellt eine anerkannte Methode in der Behandlung ausgeprägter Oberkieferrücklagen dar. Haupteinsatzgebiete sind Verlagerungen über 10 mm bzw. vernarbte Weichgewebssituationen. Im Vergleich intra- und extraoraler Distraktoren erscheinen halobogen-verankerte externe Systeme vielfältiger einsetzbar zu sein. Hierbei zeigen knochenverankerte Systeme geringere dentale Nebenwirkungen als zahngetragene. Während die Stabilität der Oberkieferposition der konventioneller Verfahren entspricht, ist die Komplikationsrate aufgrund der anspruchsvollen Technik höher.

Abstract

Maxillary distraction has evolved into an established treatment approach for the correction of severe maxillary retrusion (>10 mm) resp. in the compromised maxilla. By now external halo-borne devices dominate over intraoral distractors due to the complex anatomy and difficult vector control. Because of potential dental complications, bone anchorage is suggested. Relapse after distraction is comparable to conventional orthognathic surgery, complications, however, although less severe in most instances are on a significantly higher level.

Schlüsselwörter

Distraktionsosteogenese - externe Apparaturen - Oberkiefer

Key words

distraction osteogenesis - external device - maxilla
 

  • Literatur

  • 1 Posnick JC, Ewing MP. Skeletal stability after Le Fort I maxillary advancement in patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate. Plast Reconstr Surg 1990; 85: 706-710
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Hochban W, Ganß C, Austermann KH. Long-term results after maxillary advancement in patients with clefts. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 1993; 30: 237-243
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Heliövaara A, Ranta R, Hukki J et al. Skeletal stability of Le Fort I osteotomy in patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate. Scand J Plast Reconstr Hand Surg 2001; 35: 43-49
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Hiranaka DK, Kelly JP. Stability of simultameous orthognathic surgery on the maxilla and mandible: A computer-assisted cephalometric study. Int J Adult Orthod Orthogn Surg 1987; 2: 193-213
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Cheung LK, Chua HDP. A meta-analysis of cleft maxillary osteotomy and distraction osteogenesis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2006; 35: 14-24
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Hierl T, Klisch N, Klöppel R et al. Therapie ausgeprägter Mittelgesichtsrücklagen mit Hilfe der Distraktionsosteogenese. Mund Kiefer GesichtsChir 2003; 7: 7-13
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Watzinger F, Wanschitz F, Rasse M et al. Computer-aided surgery in distraction osteogenesis of the maxilla and mandible. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1999; 28: 171-175
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Dorfman DW, Ciminello FS, Wong GB. Craniofacial Distractor Applicator. J Craniofac Surg 2009; 20: 475-477
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Nakagawa K, Ueki K, Takatsuka S et al. A device for determining the position of internal distracters for protracting the maxilla. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 2003; 31: 234-237
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Iida S, Kogo M, Aikawa T et al. Maxillary distraction osteogenesis using the intraoral distractors and the full-covered tooth-supported maxillary splint. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2007; 65: 813-817
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Gateno J, Engel ER, Teichgraeber JF et al. A new Le Fort I internal distraction device in the treatment of severe maxillary hypoplasia. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2005; 63: 148-154
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Nadjmi N, Schutyser F, Van Erum R. Trans-sinusal maxillary distraction for correction of midfacial hypoplasia: Long-term clinical results. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2006; 35: 885-896
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Super S, Schecter JE, Bar RD. A new technique for intraoral maxillary distraction: A case report. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2006; 64: 536-542
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Cheung LK, Lo J. Distraction of Le Fort II Osteotomy by intraoral distracters: A case report. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2006; 64: 856-860
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Polley JW, Figueroa AA. Rigid external distraction: Its application in cleft maxillary deformities. Plast Reconstr Surg 1998; 102: 1360-1372
    Google Scholar
  • 16 Cheung LK, Zhang Q, Wong MCM et al. Stability consideration for internal maxillary distracters. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 2003; 31: 142-148
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Hierl T, Hemprich A. A novel modular retention system for midfacial distraction osteogenesis. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2000; 38: 623-626
    Google Scholar
  • 18 Nada RM, Sugar AW, Wijdeveld MG et al. Current practice of distraction osteogenesis for craniofacial anomalies in Europe: A web based survey. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 2010; 38: 83-89
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Cai M, Shen G, Wang X et al. Intracranial fixation pin migration: A complication of external Le Fort III distraction osteogenesis in Apert syndrome. J Craniofac Surg 2010; 21: 1557-1559
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Papagelopoulos PJ, Sapkas GS, Kateros KT et al. Halo pin intracranial penetration and epidural abscess in a patient with a previous cranioplasty: Case report and review of the literature. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2001; 26: E463-E467
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Nout E, Wolvius EB, van Adrichem LNA et al. Complications in maxillary distraction using the RED II device: A retrospective analysis of 21 patients. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2006; 36: 897-902
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Mofid MM, Manson PN, Robertson BC et al. Craniofacial distraction osteogensis: A review of 3 278 cases. Plast Reconstr Surg 2001; 108: 1103-1114
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Baek SH, Lee JK, Lee JH et al. Comparison of treatment outcome and stability between distraction osteogenesis and Le Fort I osteotomy in cleft patients with maxillary hypoplasia. J Craniofac Surg 2007; 18: 1209-1215
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar