sign in sign up
<<
Home , Distraction osteogenesis

Pamela R, Hanson, DDS, MS To Distract or not Distract in the Surgical/Orthodontic

I. Definition of Distraction Osteogenesis a. Distraction osteogenesis is a process that results in new formation between the surfaces of bone segments gradually separated by incremental traction.

b. The volume of soft tissue adjacent to the generating bone is also increased c. Histiogenesis i. occurs in different tissues: ii. bone, skin, fascia, blood vessels, nerves, muscle, ligament, & . Melugin MB, Hanson PR, Bergstrom CA, Schuckit WI, Gerald Bradley T. Soft tissue to hard tissue advancement ratios for mandibular elongation using distraction osteogenesis in children. Angle Orthod. 2006 Jan:76(1):72-6 II. Understanding Distraction Osteogenesis a. What it can and can’t do i. Can do: 1. Lengthen 2. Increase volume of bones 3- dimensionally 3. Increase the soft tissue envelope 4. Decrease relapse

Linear distraction device (above) (below)3 dimensional volume increase of right side of dog following distraction utilizing the above linear distraction device

images from : Karp NS,et al. Membranous bone lengthening: a serial histological study. Annals Plast Surg 1992:29:2-7. ii. Cannot do: 1. Make bones shorter 2. Make bones smaller 3. Move bones backwards III. To Distract or not distract is the question a. To Distract-When to consider distraction as a treatment modality i. If magnitude is too great for any other procedure ii. If function demands early and/or large magnitude correction iii. If stability is better with DO iv. If it sets up the patient for a more stable and precise definitive procedure at skeletal maturity v. If skill of the team can deliver an excellent result b. Not to Distract-When distraction is not the recommended option i. If magnitude is not great and other procedures are more precise. ii. If skeletal correction required is to retroposition a bone or decrease skeletal volume iii. If no functional deficit iv. If other procedures provide good/better stability v. If skill of the team cannot deliver an excellent result 1. Surgical skill/experience inadequate 2. Skilled orthodontist unavailable for: a. Treatment planning b. Monitoring the active distraction c. Manipulating the distal segment vi. If a patient is incapable of cooperation IV. Team Effort is required to successfully complete distraction a. Diagnosis i. Identifying the deficiency 1. Skeletal 2. Soft tissue ii. Identify location of the deficiency iii. Identify the differences between: 1. Volume a. 3 dimensional value 2. Location a. Advancing a skeletal structure (A-P) b. Placing the distal segment in a precise 3 dimensional location c. Vertically manipulating the skeletal structure i. Improves overall result ii. ie: Le Fort III advancement 1. Improves occlusion-ie closes anterior openbite 2. Increases orbital volume vertically by lowering the orbital floor

predistraction

postdistraction predistraction

early distraction prior to orthopedic mgmt

late distraction during orthopedic mgmt

Hanson PR, Melugin MB: Orthopedic and Orthodontic Management of Distal Segment Position During Distraction Osteogenesis, Atlas of Oral and Maxillofacial Clinics of North America, Sept 2008, 16.2, pp 273-286.

b. Surgical skill i. Accuracy in corticotomy/ c. Device placement i. Accuracy in placement position ii. Symmetry-if bilateral device placement iii. Ideal vector established d. Protocol-should be carefully followed to maximize outcome i. Ilizarov-1949-1st protocol with low morbidity 1. Latency period a. 5-7 days prior to device activation b. Fibrovascular matrix formation 2. Rate/rhythm a. 1mm/day b. 1mm/day completed by several increments per day 3. Consolidation a. Length-Roughly twice the of number of days of activation b. When radiographic evidence of bone consolidation e. Active distraction i. 1mm/day f. Control of distraction is crucial i. Preparation 1. Treatment plan a. Determine final position of bone b. Determine magnitude of desired distraction in mm c. Determine length of distraction device at least 2X that of the desired length of distraction in mm 2. Orthodontic preparation a. Anchorage i. To provide the opportunity to manipulate the distal segment b. Distraction stabilization appliances i. To provide multiple places for elastic traction ii. To provide maxillary expansion PRN

Hanson PR, Melugin MB. Orthodontic management of the patient undergoing mandibular distraction osteogenesis. Seminars in Orthodontics. March 1999: 5(1):25-34.

g. During distraction-control is crucial i. Activation of the distraction device 1. Millimetric lengthening-linear 2. Device manipulation only if devices is multidirectional ii. Forces/manipulation of the distal segment 1. Elastic traction 2. Maxillary expansion h. After consolidation i. Elastic traction ii. Maxillary expansion iii. Occlusal plane correction via adjusted bite block (figure below) 1. Sequential adjustment of the biteblock to promote sequential eruption of the maxillary posterior teeth 2. Closes the posterior openbite created by distraction of the mandible to the desired vertical by supererupting the maxillary posterior teeth to correct the maxillary occlusal plane and close the distraction created openbite.

Illustration by Dr Barry Grayson i. Requirements i. Cooperation by the patient crucial ii. Team treatment -control/forces can be placed by someone who will assume that role 1. Educate patient and family 2. Monitor closely the advancing/evolving distraction iii. Knowledge/experience on how to diagnose, deliver forces and monitor V. Parameters when considering distraction as a treatment option a. Magnitude i. Determining magnitude helps determine the following: 1. If distraction is the best modality 2. Device type 3. Device length b. Timing i. Timing based on functional need ii. Timing because magnitude so great a single definitive procedure would not be successful iii. Timing as the first step to a 2 step definitive surgical/orthodontic plan c. Functional disorders that drive timing i. Airway, ii. Masticatory function-Chewing/feeding iii. Speech iv. Facial appearance v. Psychosocial development d. Therapeutic benefit e. Maxillary DO after alveolar cleft graft as maxilla is single piece post graft VI. Unique to Distraction a. Shape forming effect b. Altered phenotypic expression of fibroblasts

c. Fibroblasts “polarize” orienting parallel to the vector of distraction i. Changes the direction of the fibroblast orientation ii. This in turn changes the phenotypic expression of the fibroblast iii. Which changes the shape of the bone and ultimately the position of the bone

d. Forces placed on the distal segment during distraction e. Types of forces

Hanson PR, Melugin MB. Orthodontic management of the patient undergoing mandibular distraction osteogenesis. Seminars in Orthodontics. March 1999: 5(1):25-34.

i. Distraction device activation or alteration of a multidimensional distraction device

ii. Elastic traction

iii. Headgear iv. Expansion appliances v. Distraction stabilization appliances

VII. Maxillary hypoplasia a. Le Fort III/midface deficiencies b. Le Fort I/maxillary deficiencies VIII. Unilateral Mandibular distraction IX. Bilateral Mandibular distraction

Pamela R. Hanson, DDS, MS Orthodontic Director Cleft & Craniofacial Teams Children’s Hospital of Wisconsin Surgical/ Orthodontic Director, Div. of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery, Medical College of Wisconsin Faculty, Marquette University School of , Department of Orthodontics, Diplomat of the American Board of Orthodontics.

Citations: AAO To Distract or Not Distract

1. Abbot, L. C. The operative lengthening of the tibia and fibula. J. Bone Surg. 9: 128, 1927. 2. Annino, D. J., Goguen, L. A., and Karmody, C. S. Distraction osteogenesis for reconstruction of mandibular symphyseal defects. Arch. Otolaryngol. Head Neck Surg. 120: 911, 1994. 3. Aronson, J., Good, B., Stewart, C., Harrison, B., and Harp, J. Preliminary studies of mineralization during distraction osteogenesis. Clin. Orthop. 250: 43, 1990 4. Aronson, J., Harrison, B., Boyd, C. M., Cannon, D. J.,Lubansky, H. J., and Stewart, C. Mechanical induction of osteogenesis: Preliminary studies. Ann. Clin. Lab. Sci. 18: 195, 1988. 5. Aronson, J., Harrison, B., Boyd, C. M., Cannon, D. J., and Lubansky, H. J. Mechanical induction of osteogenesis. J. Pediatr. Orthop. 8: 396, 1988. 6. Arnoson, J., and Shen, X. Experimental healing of distraction osteogenesis comparing metaphyseal with diaphyseal sites. Clin. Orthop. 301: 25, 1994. 7. Aro, H. Biomechanics of distraction. In J. G. McCarthy, (Ed.), Distraction of the Craniofacial . New York: Springer-Verlag, 1999. Pp. 20-50. 8. Brighton, C. T., and Hunt, R. M. Early histological and ultrastructural changes in medullary fracture callus. J. Bone Joint Surg. (Am.) 73: 832, 1991. 9. Califacno, L., Cortese, A., Zupi, A., and Tajana, G. Mandibular lengthening by external distraction: An experimental study in the rabbit. J. Oral Maxillofac. Surg. 52: 1179, 1994. 10. Carls F, Sailer H. Seven years’ experience with mandibular distraction in children. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 1998;26:197Y208 11. Castero, H. J., and Salyer, K. E. Regenerative potential of bone and periosteum. Surg. Forum 26: 555, 1975. 12. Centrella, M., McCarthy, T. L., and Canalis, E. Current concepts review: Transforming growth factor beta and remodeling of bone. J. Bone Joint Surg. (Am.) 73: 1418, 1991. 13. Civelek B, Karamursel S, Ozdil K, et al. A potential complication with an extraoral distractor for mandible lengthening: facial nerve paralysis. Plast Reconstr Surg 2006;117:698Y699 14. Codvilla, A. On the means of lengthening in the lower limbs, the muscles and tissue which are shortened through deformity. Am. J. Orthop. Surg. 2: 353, 1905. 15. Constantino, P. D., Shybut, G., Friedman, C. D., et al. Segmental mandibular regeneration by distraction osteogenesis. Arch. Otolaryngol. Head Neck Surg. 116: 535, 16. Cope JB, Samchukov ML, Cherkashin AM. Mandibular distraction osteogenesis: a historic perspective and future directions. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1999;115:448Y460 17. De Bastiani, G., Aldegheri, R., Enzi-Brivio, L., and Trivella, G. Limb lengthening by callus distraction (callotasis). J. Pediatr. Orthop. 7: 129, 1987. 18. Denny AD, Kalantarian B. HansonP. Rotational advancement of the Midface by Distraction Osteogenesis. Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery. 111(6):1800-1803, May 2003. 19. Figueroa AA, Polley JW, Friede H, Ko EW. Long-term skeletal stability after maxillary advancement with distraction osteogenesisusing a rigid external distraction device in cleft maxillary deformities. 20. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2004;114:1382–1392; discussion 1393 21. Fishgrund, J., Paley, D., and Suter, D. Variables affecting time to during limb lengthening. Clin. Orthop. 301: 31, 1994. 22. Freitas RD, Tolazzi AR, Alonso N, et al. Evaluation of molar teeth and buds in patients submitted to mandible distraction: long-term results. Plast Reconstr Surg 2008;121:1335Y1342 23. Fritz MA, Sidman JD. Distraction osteogenesis of the mandible. Curr Opin Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2004;12:513Y518 Master et al The Journal of Craniofacial Surgery & Volume 21, Number 5, September 2010. 24. Frost HM. Mechanical determinants of bone modeling. Metab Bone Dis Relat Res. 1982;4:217–229. 25. Gosain, A. K., Santoro, T. D., Song, L., Capel, C. C., Sudhakar, P. V., and Matloub, H. S. Osteogenesis in calvarial defects: Contribution of the dura, the pericranium, and the surrounding bone in adult versus infant animals. Plast. Reconstr. Surg. 112: 515, 2003. 26. Grayson BH, Santiago PE. Treatment planning and biomechanics of distraction osteogenesis from an orthodontic perspective. Semin Orthod 1999;5:9Y24 27. Grayson BH, McCormick S, Santiago PE, et al. Vector of device placement and trajectory of mandibular distraction. J Craniofac Surg 1997;8:473Y480 28. Guichet, J. M., Braillon, P., Bondenreider, O., and Lascombes, P. Periosteum and in bone lengthening: A DEXA quantitative evaluation in rabbits. Acta Orthop. Scand. 69: 527, 1998. 29. Gursoy S, Hukki J, Hurmerinta K. Five year follow-up of mandibular distraction osteogenesis on the dentofacial structures of syndromic children. Orthod Craniofac Res 2008;11:57Y64 30. Hanson PR, Melugin MB. Orthodontic management of the patient undergoing mandibular distraction osteogenesis. Semin Orthod 1999;5:25Y34 31. Hanson PR, Melugin MB: Orthopedic and Orthodontic Management of Distal Segment Position During Distraction Osteogenesis, Atlas of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Clinics of North America, Sept 2008, 16.2, pp 273-286. 32. Hettinger P, Hanson P, Denny A, Le Fort III Distraction Using Rotation Advancement of the Midface in Patients with Cleft Lip and Palate. Plast Reconstr Surg 2013: 1532-1541. 33. Hollier LH, Kim JH, Grayson B, et al. Mandibular growth after distraction in patients under 48 months of age. Plast Reconstr Surg 1999;103:1361Y1370 34. Hurmerinta K, Hukki J. The vector control in lower jaw distraction osteogenesis using an extraoral multidirectional device. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 2001;29:263Y270 35. Ilizarov, G. A. The principles of the Ilizarov method. Bull. Hosp. J. Dis. Orthop. Inst. 48: 1, 1988. 36. Ilizarov, G. A. The tension-stress on the genesis and growth of tissue: Part I. The influence of stability of fixation and soft tissue preservation. Clin. Orthop. 238: 249, 1989. 37. Ilizarov, G. A. The tension-stress effect on the genesis and growth of tissue: Part II. The influence of rate and frequency of distraction. Clin. Orthop . 239: 263, 1989. 38. Illizarov, G. A., and Deviatov, A. A. Surgical elongation of the leg. Ortop. Travmatol. Protez. 32: 20, 1971. 39. Illizarov, G. A., Ledyaev, V. I., and Shitin, V. P. Experimental studies of bone lengthening. Exp. Khir. Anesth. 14: 3, 1969. 40. Karaharju-Suvanto T, Peltonen J, Ranta R, et al. The effect of gradual distraction on the mandible on the sheep temporomandibular joint. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1996;25:152Y156 41. Karaharju-Suvanto, T., Peltonen, J., Kahri, A., and Karaharju, E. O. Distraction osteogenesis of the mandible: An experimental study on sheep. Int. J. Oral Maxillofac. 42. Karp, N. S., McCarthy, J. G., Schreiber, J. S., Sissons, H. A., and Thorne, C. H. Membranous bone lengthening:A serial histologic study. Ann. Plast. Surg. 29: 2, 1992. 43. Karp, N. S., Thorne, C. H. M., McCarthy, J. G., and Sissons, H. A. Bone lengthening in the craniofacial skeleton. Ann. Plast. Surg. 24: 231, 1990 44. Knize, D. M. The influence of periosteum and calcitonin on onlay bone graft survival. Plast. Reconstr. Surg. 53: 190, 1974. 45. Kojimoto, H., Yasui, N., Goto, T., Mastuda, S., and Shimomura, Y. Bone lengthening in rabbits by callus distraction. J. Bone Joint Surg. (Br.) 70: 543, 1988. 46. Komori E, Sagara N, Aigase K. A method for evaluating skeletal relapsing force during maxillomandibular fixation after : a preliminary report. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1991;100:38Y46 47. Massague, J. The transforming growth factor-beta family. Annu. Rev. Cell Biol. 6: 597, 1990 48. McCarthy JG, Schreiber J, Karp N, et al. Lengthening of the human mandible by gradual distraction. Plast Reconstr Surg 1992;89:1Y8 49. McCarthy JG, Katzen T, Hopper R, et al The first decade of mandibular distraction: lessons we have learned. Plast Reconstr Surg 2002;110:1704Y1713 50. McCarthy JG. The role of distraction osteogenesis in the reconstruction of the mandible in unilateral craniofacial microsomia. Clin Plast Surg 1994;21:625Y631 51. McCarthy JG, Stelnicki EJ, Mehrara BJ, et al. Distraction osteogenesis of the craniofacial skeleton. Plast Reconstr Surg 2001;107:1812Y1827 52. McCarthy JG, Grayson BH, Williams JK, et al. Distraction of the mandible: the New York University experience. In: McCarthy J, ed. Distraction of the Craniofacial Skeleton. Berlin, Germany: Springer, 1999:80Y203 53. Melugin MB, Hanson PR, Bergstrom CA, Schuckit WI, Gerald Bradle T. Soft tissue to hard tissue advancement ratios for mandibular elongation using distraction osteogenesis in children. Angle Orthod. 2006 Jan:76(1):72-6. 54. Michieli, S., and Miotti, B. Controlled gradual lengthening of the mandible after osteotomy. Minerva Stomatol. 25: 77, 1976. Mofid MM, Manson PN, Robertson BC, et al. Craniofacial distraction osteogenesis: a review of 3278 cases. Plast Reconstr Surg 2001;108:1103Y1114 55. Mofid, MM, Manson PN, Robertson BC, Tufaro AP, Elias JJ, Vander Kilk CA. Craniofacial distraction osteogenesis: A review of 3278 cases. Plast. Reconstr. Surg. 2001: 108:1103. 56. Munro IR. One-stage reconstruction of the temporomandibular joint in hemifacial microsomia. Plast Reconstr Surg 1980;66:699Y710 57. Owen, M. The origin of bone cells in the postnatal organism. Arthritis Rheum. 23: 1073, 1980. 58. Owen, M. Cell population kinetics of an osteogenic tissue. J. Cell Biol. 19: 19, 1963 59. Paley, D. Problems, obstacles and complications of limb lengthening by Ilizarov technique. Clin. Orthop. 250:81, 1990. 60. Schendel SA, Epker BN. Results after mandibular advancement surgery: an analysis of 87 cases. J Oral Surg 1980;38:265Y282 61. Shetye PR, Warren SM, Brown D, et al. Documentation of the incidents associated with mandibular distraction: introduction of a new stratification system. Plast Reconstr Surg 2009;123:627Y634 62. Skoog, T. The use of periosteal flaps in the repair of clefts of the primary palate. Cleft Palate J. 2: 332, 1965. 63. Snyder, C. C., Levine, G. A., Swanson, H. M., and Browne, E. Z. Mandibular lengthening by gradual distraction. Plast. Reconstr. Surg. 5: 506, 1973. 64. Sproul, J. T., and Price, C. T. Recent advances in limb lengthening: Part II. Biological advances. Orthop. Rev. 21: 425, 1992. 65. Swennen G, Schliephake H, Dempf R, et al. Craniofacial distraction osteogenesis: a review of the literature. Part 1: clinical studies. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2001;30:89Y103 66. Thompson, N., and Casson, J. A. Experimental onlay bone grafts to the jaws. Plast. Reconstr. Surg. 46: 341, 1970. 1498 PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY, November 2004 67. Tonna, E. A., and Cronkite, E. P. Autoradiographic studies of cell proliferation in the periosteum of intact and fractured femora of mice utilizing DNA labeling with 3H-thymidine. Proc. Soc. Exp. Biol. Med. 107: 719, 1961. 68. Toth BA, Kim JW, Chin M, Cedars M. Distraction osteogenesis and its application to the midface and bony orbit in syndromes. J Craniofac Surg. 1998;9:100–113; discussion 119. 69. Uckan S, Veziroglu F, Arman A. Unexpected breakage of mandibular midline distraction device: case report. Oral Surg. Oral Med. Oral Pathol. Oral Radiol. Endod 2006: 102:e21-e25. 70. Van Sickels JE, Richardson RA. Stability of orthognathic surgery: a review of rigid fixation. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1996;34: 279Y285 71. Van Strijen PJ, Breuning KH, Becking AG, et al. Stability after distraction osteogenesis to lengthen the mandible: results in 50 patients. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2004;62:304Y307 72. White, S. H., and Kenwright, J. The timing of distraction of an osteotomy. J. Bone Joint Surg. (Br.) 72: 356,1990. 73. White, S. H., and Kenwright, J. The importance of delay in distraction of . Orthop. Clin. North Am. 22: 569, 1991.