Longitudinal Cephalometric Analysis After Maxillary Distraction Osteogenesis
Michael Krimmel, Carl‐Peter Cornelius, Margit Bacher, Dirk G licher, Siegmar Reinert
Abstract
Michael Krimmel, Carl‐Peter Cornelius, Margit Bacher, Dirk G licher, Siegmar Reinert
Abstract
The aim of this study was to analyze the long-term dentoskeletal changes in patients who received distraction osteogenesis of the maxilla. Seventeen patients aged 12 to 31 years underwent rigid external distraction osteogenesis for treatment of maxillary hypoplasia. Cephalograms were evaluated retrospectively regarding linear and angular measurements. Follow-up times ranged from 1 to 5 years. In two patients, there was no consolidation of the Le Fort I segment to the midface. After the 0- to 12-month period, the maxilla had a stable position in all patients. Nevertheless, there was further decrease of SNA and ANB and an increase of the facial concavity thereafter. Ongoing growth of the facial skeleton must be considered when distraction osteogenesis is chosen for the advancement of the maxilla in adolescents.
OpenAlex reports 16 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
The aim of this study was to analyze the long-term dentoskeletal changes in patients who received distraction osteogenesis of the maxilla. Seventeen patients aged 12 to 31 years underwent rigid external distraction osteogenesis for treatment of maxillary hypoplasia. Cephalograms were evaluated retrospectively regarding linear and angular measurements. Follow-up times ranged from 1 to 5 years. In two patients, there was no consolidation of the Le Fort I segment to the midface. After the 0- to 12-month period, the maxilla had a stable position in all patients. Nevertheless, there was further decrease of SNA and ANB and an increase of the facial concavity thereafter. Ongoing growth of the facial skeleton must be considered when distraction osteogenesis is chosen for the advancement of the maxilla in adolescents.
Key concepts: Medicine, Distraction osteogenesis, Maxilla, Maxillary hypoplasia, Distraction, Cephalometry, Orthodontics, Hypoplasia