Abstract
Mandibular distraction has been successfully used to correct mandibular hypoplasia in all three dimensions since its introduction in 1989 by McCarthy and NYU colleagues [1]. Patients with craniofacial microsomia, Nager syndrome, Treacher Collins syndrome, Robin sequence, temporomandibular joint ankylosis, posttraumatic growth disturbances, and a variety of other mandibular developmental disturbances have significantly benefited from this technique. As with traditional orthognathic surgery, pre- and post-distraction orthodontic therapy is an integral part of the successful outcome of distraction. The goals of pre- and post-distraction orthodontics therapy include the following: preoperative evaluation of the craniofacial skeletal and dental relationships, preparation of the dentition prior to the placement of a distraction device, collaboration with the surgeon on the placement of the distraction device for the optimal vector of distraction, monitoring of the skeletal changes during the activation phase, molding of the generate during the activation and consolidation phase, the management of post-distraction occlusion for long-term stability, and continued longitudinal follow-up.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
McCarthy JG, et al. Lengthening the human mandible by gradual distraction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1992;89(1):1–8; discussion 9–10.
Davidson EH, et al. The evolution of mandibular distraction: device selection. Plast Reconstr Surg. 126(6):2061–70.
Grayson BH, Santiago PE. Treatment planning and biomechanics of distraction osteogenesis from an orthodontic perspective. Semin Orthod. 1999;5(1):9–24.
Dec W, et al. The importance of vector selection in preoperative planning of unilateral mandibular distraction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2008;121(6):2084–92; discussion 2093–4.
Vendittelli BL, et al. The importance of vector selection in preoperative planning of bilateral mandibular distraction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2008;122(4):1144–53.
Vendittelli BL. Moldability of the callus after distraction osteogenesis. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2000;58(7):828.
McCarthy JG, et al. Molding of the regenerate in mandibular distraction: clinical experience. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2003;112(5):1239–46.
Peltomaki T, et al. Moulding of the generate to control open bite during mandibular distraction osteogenesis. Eur J Orthod. 2002;24(6):639–45.
Shetye PR, et al. Long-term stability and growth following unilateral mandibular distraction in growing children with craniofacial microsomia. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2006;118(4):985–95.
Weichman K, et al. Early distraction for mild to moderate unilateral craniofacial microsomia (UCFM): long-term follow-up outcomes and recommendations. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2017;139(4):941e–53e.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Shetye, P.R., Grayson, B.H. (2017). Mandibular Distraction, Orthodontic Considerations. In: McCarthy, J. (eds) Craniofacial Distraction. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-52564-8_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-52564-8_4
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-52562-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-52564-8
eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)