Distraction osteogenesis of the porcine mandible: Histomorphometric evaluation of bone

被引:47
|
作者
Glowacki, J
Shusterman, EM
Troulis, M
Holmes, R
Perrott, D
Kaban, LB
机构
[1] Harvard Univ, Sch Dent Med, Massachusetts Gen Hosp, Dept Oral & Maxillofacial Surg,Skeletal Biol Res, Boston, MA 02115 USA
[2] Univ Calif San Diego, Div Plast Surg, San Diego, CA 92103 USA
来源
PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY | 2004年 / 113卷 / 02期
关键词
D O I
10.1097/01.PRS.0000101061.99577.09
中图分类号
R61 [外科手术学];
学科分类号
摘要
Distraction osteogenesis is a technique for skeletal lengthening that exploits the body's innate capacity for bone formation in response to tension forces on the repair callus. The authors developed a distraction osteogenesis model with a semiburied device in the Yucatan minipig mandible because of similarities between human and porcine mandibular anatomy, temporomandibular function, chewing patterns, and bone turnover rates. The purpose of this study was to measure histomorphometric bone fill after different latency periods, rates of distraction, and duration of neutral fixation in the minipig mandible. In addition, the relationship between histomorphometric bone fill and clinical stability was investigated. Mandibular osteotomies in 20 female Yucatan minipigs weighing 25 to 30 kg were distracted with modified semiburied distraction devices. Variables included 0-day or 4-day latency; 1-mm, 2-mm, or 4-mm daily distraction rates; gap size of 7 or 12 mm; and evaluation after neutral fixation for various lengths of time. Specimens were fixed in 2% paraformaldehyde, pH 7.4, before being embedded in methylmethacrylate. Sections were prepared from the region just below the inferior alveolar canal. The area of new bone formation within the gap was measured and expressed as a percentage of the total area of the distraction gap. Bone fill ranged from 0 to 100 percent. A pilot study with 7-mm advancements showed similar bone fill with 0-day or 4-day latency, but with poor reproducibility. Mandibles that were distracted to 12 min at 1 mm per day exhibited nearly complete bone fill, either with 0-day latency (average, 93 percent) or 4-day latency (average, 100 percent). Mandibles that had been distracted for 3 days at 4 mm per day showed moderate osteogenesis and clinical stability with increasing time of neutral fixation. Bone fill was significantly correlated with clinical stability (Spearman r = 0.801, p = 0.001). Histological examination showed exuberant periosteal osteogenesis in distracted mandibles, even in those that showed poor bone fill and clinical stability. Thus, the periosteum appears to be a major source of new bone formation. These results show that osteogenesis was nearly complete with I mm per day and 0-day or 4-day latency. These results are consistent with the authors' previously reported clinical and radiographic observations that a latency period is not necessary for successful healing of the mandibular distraction osteogenesis wound.
引用
收藏
页码:566 / 573
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Alveolar Distraction Osteogenesis in the Human Mandible: A Clinical and Histomorphometric Study
    Sezer, Bahar
    Koyuncu, Banu Ozveri
    Gunbay, Tayfun
    Sezak, Murat
    [J]. IMPLANT DENTISTRY, 2012, 21 (04) : 317 - 322
  • [2] Histomorphometric evaluation of delayed changes in masseter muscle after lengthening the rabbit mandible by distraction osteogenesis
    Tuez, H. H.
    Dolanmaz, D.
    Pampu, A. Alper
    Kisnisci, R. S.
    Guenhan, Oe
    [J]. ORAL DISEASES, 2009, 15 (02) : 142 - 147
  • [3] Histomorphometric Analysis of Delayed Implantation After Horizontal Distraction Osteogenesis of the Mandible in Dogs
    Sun, Ju-Rim
    Kim, Su-Gwan
    Moon, Seong-Yong
    Lim, Sung-Chul
    Ong, Joo L.
    [J]. IMPLANT DENTISTRY, 2009, 18 (05) : 413 - 419
  • [4] Proliferation of masseter myocytes after distraction osteogenesis of the porcine mandible
    Castaño, FJ
    Troulis, MJ
    Glowacki, J
    Kaban, LB
    Yates, KE
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ORAL AND MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, 2001, 59 (03) : 302 - 307
  • [5] Distraction osteogenesis of costochondral bone grafts in the mandible - Discussion
    Stelnicki, EJ
    Hollier, L
    Lee, C
    Lin, WY
    Grayson, B
    McCarthy, JG
    Polley, JW
    [J]. PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY, 2002, 109 (03): : 934 - 935
  • [6] Histomorphometric evaluation of short-term changes in masseter muscle after lengthening the rabbit mandible by distraction osteogenesis
    Tüz, HH
    Kisnisci, RS
    Günhan, M
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ORAL AND MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, 2003, 61 (05) : 615 - 620
  • [7] Strain-related bone remodeling in distraction osteogenesis of the mandible
    Meyer, U
    Wiesmann, HP
    Kruse-Lösler, B
    Handschel, J
    Stratmann, U
    Joos, U
    [J]. PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY, 1999, 103 (03): : 800 - 807
  • [8] Vertical distraction osteogenesis of fibular bone flap in reconstructed mandible
    Eski, Muhitdin
    Turegun, Murat
    Deveci, Mustafa
    Gokce, Hasan Suat
    Sengezer, Mustafa
    [J]. ANNALS OF PLASTIC SURGERY, 2006, 57 (06) : 631 - 636
  • [9] Biomechanics of the Canine Mandible During Bone Transport Distraction Osteogenesis
    Zapata, Uriel
    Dechow, Paul C.
    Watanabe, Ikuya
    Elsalanty, Mohammed E.
    Opperman, Lynne A.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF BIOMECHANICAL ENGINEERING-TRANSACTIONS OF THE ASME, 2014, 136 (11):
  • [10] Distraction osteogenesis to widen the mandible
    Bell, WH
    Harper, RP
    Gonzalez, M
    Cherkashin, AM
    Samchukov, ML
    [J]. BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, 1997, 35 (01): : 11 - 19