The effects of magnitude and frequency of distraction forces on tissue regeneration in distraction osteogenesis of the mandible

被引:44
|
作者
Kessler, PA
Merten, HA
Neukam, FW
Wiltfang, J
机构
[1] Univ Erlangen Nurnberg, Dept Oral & Maxillofacial Surg, D-91054 Erlangen, Germany
[2] Univ Gottingen, Dept Oral & Maxillofacial Surg, D-3400 Gottingen, Germany
关键词
D O I
10.1097/00006534-200201000-00027
中图分类号
R61 [外科手术学];
学科分类号
摘要
Callus distraction has become an accepted treatment procedure to lengthen hypoplastic mandibles in humans. For this purpose, extraoral and intraoral devices have been applied successfully. The effects of the distraction vector, distractor stability, and rate and frequency of callus distraction on the regenerating tissues have been examined in various studies. In an experimental animal trial on pigs (n = 12), a newly developed microhydraulic osteodistractor was tested. The animals were evenly assigned to two groups to perform a continuous and noncontinuous osteodistraction of the mandible. Initially, the forces necessary to distract the pig mandibles were recorded from a noncontinuous distraction procedure; the results were then used to perform continuous bone distraction. Besides testing the new distractor, the study proved that in continuous osteodistraction, intramembranous bone regeneration occurred, whereas in noncontinuous osteodistraction the bone regeneration process followed a chondroid ossification. In continuous osteodistraction, the bone regeneration proceeded at a higher speed with the lower distraction forces compared with noncontinuous distraction, thereby reducing the consolidation period. Clinical and microscopical results are presented.
引用
收藏
页码:171 / 180
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] THE HISTOLOGIC ANALYSIS OF DISTRACTION OSTEOGENESIS OF THE MANDIBLE IN RABBITS
    KOMURO, Y
    TAKATO, T
    HARII, K
    YONEMARA, Y
    PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY, 1994, 94 (01) : 152 - 159
  • [32] Unique rodent model of distraction osteogenesis of the mandible
    Buchman, SR
    Ignelzi, MA
    Radu, C
    Wilensky, J
    Rosenthal, AH
    Tong, L
    Rhee, ST
    Goldstein, SA
    ANNALS OF PLASTIC SURGERY, 2002, 49 (05) : 511 - 519
  • [33] Imaging the neonatal mandible for accurate distraction osteogenesis
    Katzen, JT
    Holliday, RA
    McCarthy, JG
    JOURNAL OF CRANIOFACIAL SURGERY, 2001, 12 (01) : 26 - 30
  • [34] Dentigerous cyst after distraction osteogenesis of the mandible
    Murray, Dylan John
    Chong, David K.
    Sandor, George K. B.
    Forrest, Christopher R.
    JOURNAL OF CRANIOFACIAL SURGERY, 2007, 18 (06) : 1349 - 1352
  • [36] Forces Exerted in Craniofacial Distraction Osteogenesis
    Kalmar, Christopher L.
    Wes, Ari M.
    Mazzaferro, Daniel M.
    Bartlett, Scott P.
    Taylor, Jesse A.
    JOURNAL OF CRANIOFACIAL SURGERY, 2022, 33 (01) : 187 - 191
  • [37] Distraction osteogenesis of the mandible: evaluation of callus distraction by B-scan ultrasonography
    Nocini, PF
    Albanese, M
    Wangerin, K
    Fior, A
    Trevisiol, L
    Kretschmer, W
    JOURNAL OF CRANIO-MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, 2002, 30 (05) : 286 - 291
  • [38] Use of a plate-guided distraction device for transport distraction osteogenesis of the mandible
    Herford, AS
    JOURNAL OF ORAL AND MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, 2004, 62 (04) : 412 - 420
  • [39] Balancing Distraction Forces in the Mandible: Newton's Third Law of Distraction
    Shakir, Sameer
    Naran, Sanjay
    Lowe, Kristen M.
    Bartlett, Scott P.
    PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY-GLOBAL OPEN, 2018, 6 (09) : e1856
  • [40] The Effect of Distraction-Resisting Forces on the Tibia During Distraction Osteogenesis
    Shyam, Ashok K.
    Song, Hae-Ryong
    An, Hyonggin
    Isaac, Dileep
    Shetty, Gautam M.
    Lee, Seok Hyun
    JOURNAL OF BONE AND JOINT SURGERY-AMERICAN VOLUME, 2009, 91A (07): : 1671 - 1682