Skeletal stability after maxillary distraction osteogenesis or conventional Le Fort I osteotomy in patients with cleft lip and palate: A superimposition-based cephalometric analysis.
Joakim Lundberg, Nameer Al-Taai, Eva Levring Jäghagen, Maria Ransjö, Mats Sjöström
{"title":"Skeletal stability after maxillary distraction osteogenesis or conventional Le Fort I osteotomy in patients with cleft lip and palate: A superimposition-based cephalometric analysis.","authors":"Joakim Lundberg, Nameer Al-Taai, Eva Levring Jäghagen, Maria Ransjö, Mats Sjöström","doi":"10.1007/s10006-024-01227-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The aim was to assess skeletal stability after maxillary advancement using either distraction osteogenesis (DO) or conventional Le Fort I osteotomy (CO) in patients with cleft lip and palate (CLP) or cleft palate (CP) utilising a new superimposition-based cephalometric method.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>This retrospective study included patients who were treated with DO (N = 12) or CO (N = 9). Sagittal and vertical changes after surgery, and skeletal stability at 18 months post-operatively were assessed with superimposition-based cephalometry, comparing lateral cephalograms performed pre-operatively (T0), post-operatively after CO or immediately after completed distraction in DO (T1), and at 18 months of follow-up (T2).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mean sagittal movements from T0 to T2 in the DO and CO groups were 5.9 mm and 2.2 mm, respectively, with a skeletal relapse rate of 16% in the DO group and 15% in the CO group between T1 and T2. The vertical mean movement from T0 to T2 in the DO and CO groups was 2.8 mm and 2.0 mm, respectively, and the skeletal relapse rate between T1 and T2 was 36% in the DO group and 32% in the CO group.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Sagittal advancement of the maxilla was stable, in contrast to the vertical downward movement, which showed more-extensive relapse in both groups. Despite more-extensive maxillary advancement in the DO group, the rates of skeletal relapse were similar.</p>","PeriodicalId":47251,"journal":{"name":"Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery-Heidelberg","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11144679/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery-Heidelberg","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10006-024-01227-0","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/2/16 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose: The aim was to assess skeletal stability after maxillary advancement using either distraction osteogenesis (DO) or conventional Le Fort I osteotomy (CO) in patients with cleft lip and palate (CLP) or cleft palate (CP) utilising a new superimposition-based cephalometric method.
Method: This retrospective study included patients who were treated with DO (N = 12) or CO (N = 9). Sagittal and vertical changes after surgery, and skeletal stability at 18 months post-operatively were assessed with superimposition-based cephalometry, comparing lateral cephalograms performed pre-operatively (T0), post-operatively after CO or immediately after completed distraction in DO (T1), and at 18 months of follow-up (T2).
Results: The mean sagittal movements from T0 to T2 in the DO and CO groups were 5.9 mm and 2.2 mm, respectively, with a skeletal relapse rate of 16% in the DO group and 15% in the CO group between T1 and T2. The vertical mean movement from T0 to T2 in the DO and CO groups was 2.8 mm and 2.0 mm, respectively, and the skeletal relapse rate between T1 and T2 was 36% in the DO group and 32% in the CO group.
Conclusion: Sagittal advancement of the maxilla was stable, in contrast to the vertical downward movement, which showed more-extensive relapse in both groups. Despite more-extensive maxillary advancement in the DO group, the rates of skeletal relapse were similar.
期刊介绍：
Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery founded as Mund-, Kiefer- und Gesichtschirurgie is a peer-reviewed online journal. It is designed for clinicians as well as researchers.The quarterly journal offers comprehensive coverage of new techniques, important developments and innovative ideas in oral and maxillofacial surgery and interdisciplinary aspects of cranial, facial and oral diseases and their management. The journal publishes papers of the highest scientific merit and widest possible scope on work in oral and maxillofacial surgery as well as supporting specialties. Practice-oriented articles help improve the methods used in oral and maxillofacial surgery.Every aspect of oral and maxillofacial surgery is fully covered through a range of invited review articles, clinical and research articles, technical notes, abstracts, and case reports. Specific topics are: aesthetic facial surgery, clinical pathology, computer-assisted surgery, congenital and craniofacial deformities, dentoalveolar surgery, head and neck oncology, implant dentistry, oral medicine, orthognathic surgery, reconstructive surgery, skull base surgery, TMJ and trauma.Time-limited reviewing and electronic processing allow to publish articles as fast as possible. Accepted articles are rapidly accessible online.Clinical studies submitted for publication have to include a declaration that they have been approved by an ethical committee according to the World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki 1964 (last amendment during the 52nd World Medical Association General Assembly, Edinburgh, Scotland, October 2000). Experimental animal studies have to be carried out according to the principles of laboratory animal care (NIH publication No 86-23, revised 1985).
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
