DOCSLIB.ORG

Influence of Vomer Flap on Craniofacial Growth in Patients with Cleft Lip And

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Influence of Vomer Flap on Craniofacial Growth in Patients with Cleft Lip And Journal of Cranio-Maxillo-Facial Surgery 47 (2019) 902e908 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Journal of Cranio-Maxillo-Facial Surgery journal homepage: www.jcmfs.com Review Influence of vomer flap on craniofacial growth in patients with cleft lip and palate: A systematic review * Lurian Minatel ,Jessica Marcela de Luna Gomes, Cleidiel Aparecido Araújo Lemos, Joao~ Pedro Justino de Oliveira Limírio, Eduardo Piza Pellizzer Department of Dental Materials and Prosthodontics, Sao Paulo State University (UNESP), School of Dentistry, Sao Paulo, Brazil article info abstract Article history: The aim of this review was to evaluate the impact of the vomer flap on craniofacial growth in patients Paper received 23 November 2018 with cleft lip and palate. The review was conducted according to the PRISMA checklist and is registered Accepted 11 March 2019 in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO d CRD42018095714). Two Available online 15 March 2019 investigators performed the research using the PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science data- bases for studies published until November 2018. The focused question was ‘Does the vomer flap have a Keywords: lesser impact on craniofacial growth in patients with cleft lip and palate?’. A total of 13 articles was Cleft lip selected for this review, comparing the vomer flap technique with other flap surgery techniques. The Cleft palate Vomer flap outcomes analyzed were: facial development (primary outcome); and the growth of the maxilla and fi Growth and development mandible, occlusion, occurrence of stula, and speech development (secondary outcomes). It was Systematic review concluded that there is no difference in impact between vomer flap and the other flap surgery techniques on craniofacial development. © 2019 Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of European Association for Cranio-Maxillo-Facial Surgery. 1. Introduction some studies have proposed techniques to reduce scarring in the palate (Fudalej et al., 2012). In addition, some authors have re- The main objective of surgical treatment in patients with cleft ported that surgical time might also be an influencing factor lip and palate is the anatomical closure of the defect in order to limiting maxillary growth (Graber, 1949; Bardach et al.,1984; Friede prevent impairment of speech development and feeding, while and Enemark, 2001). ensuring that there is no significant restriction of maxillary growth, The vomer flap surgical technique for closure of the hard palate which in turn may be influenced by the choice of surgical protocol has been used since 1926, and has undergone subsequent modifi- (Rohrich et al., 2000; Shaw et al., 1992; Silva Filho et al., 2001, cations (Liao et al., 2014; de Jong and Breugem, 2014). The advan- Agrawal, 2009). Therefore, several protocols have been proposed tages of this type of flap are ease of execution, minimal trauma to for the treatment of patients with cleft lip and palate in an attempt tissues, and reduced surgical time. Additionally, the flap is located to minimize the influence of surgery on craniofacial growth. The in a region of good vascularization, and provides effective nasal protocols vary according to the techniques employed, period of coverage in most types of fissure, thereby proving to be useful in intervention, treatment sequence for lip, hard, and soft palate the majority of patients with cleft lip and palate (Kobus, 1984; correction, and presurgical orthodontic and orthopedic in- Agrawal and Panda, 2006). terventions (Silva Filho et al., 2001; Kulewicz and Dudkiewicz, The treatment of patients with cleft lip and palate is complex, 2010). and although there are a large number of surgical procedures in It has been hypothesized that the scars caused by palatoplasty use, there is no consensus regarding the most effective technique. procedures contribute to maxillary growth disturbances. Therefore, This may be attributed to the numerous criteria that need to be considered and evaluated in formulating the ideal treatment method (Rohrich et al., 2000; Agrawal, 2009; Kulewicz and Dudkiewicz, 2010). Therefore, this systematic review was carried * d Corresponding author. Department of Materials and Prosthodontics, UNESP out to establish whether the vomer flap has a lesser impact on Univ Estadual Paulista, Jose Bonifacio Street, 1193, 16015-050, Araçatuba, Sao~ Paulo, Brazil. Fax: þ551836363297. craniofacial growth in patients with cleft lip and palate. E-mail address: [email protected] (L. Minatel). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcms.2019.03.011 1010-5182/© 2019 Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of European Association for Cranio-Maxillo-Facial Surgery. L. Minatel et al. / Journal of Cranio-Maxillo-Facial Surgery 47 (2019) 902e908 903 2. Materials and methods one study, by Ganesh et al. (2015), which was a randomized controlled trial (RCT), the Cochrane scale was used to assess the risk 2.1. Registry protocol of bias. This systematic review was performed according to the 2.6. Additional analyses Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta- Analyses (PRISMA) checklist (Moher et al., 2010). Furthermore, The kappa statistic (k) was used to determine inter-reader the methods used in this systematic review were registered in the agreement during the article selection process in the database International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROS- search. PERO d CRD42018095714). 3. Results 2.2. Eligibility criteria 3.1. Study selection The study focused on addressing the following question: ‘Does the vomer flap have a lesser impact on craniofacial growth in pa- The database search retrieved 243 articles: 85 from PubMed/ tients with cleft lip and palate?‘. The PICO tool was used to identify MEDLINE, 71 from Web of Science, and 87 from Embase. After the the components of clinical evidence, which are as follows: removal of duplicates, 89 studies remained. After reading the titles and abstracts, 52 studies were selected for complete reading, of 1. Population d non-syndromic patients with cleft lip and palate. which 39 were excluded using the eligibility criteria. Finally, 13 2. Intervention d patients who underwent vomer flap for studies were selected for this review (Fig. 1). correction of cleft in the hard palate. The inter-investigator agreement for articles selected from 3. Comparison d patients who underwent other surgical tech- PubMed/MEDLINE (k ¼ 0.82), Embase (k ¼ 0.89), and the Web of niques for correction of cleft in the hard palate. Science (k ¼ 0.92) indicated a high level of agreement (Landis and 4. Outcome d craniofacial growth (primary outcome); speech Koch, 1977). development and occurrence of fistula (secondary outcomes). Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and prospective and 3.2. Study characteristics retrospective studies were included in this review (retrospective studies were included because of the limited number of RCTs on the Of the 13 studies included in this review (Jonsson et al., 1980; subject). In vitro studies, animal studies, case series, case reports, Tanino et al., 1997; Silva Filho et al., 2001; Friede and Enemark, and systematic reviews were excluded. 2001; Melissaratou and Friede, 2002; Johnston et al., 2004; Kulewicz and Dudkiewicz, 2010; Fudalej et al., 2012, 2013; Liao et 2.3. Information sources and search al., 2014; Ganesh et al., 2015; Xu et al., 2015; Rossell-Perry, 2018), one was a randomized clinical study (Ganesh et al., 2015) while the Two independent authors (LM, CAAL) conducted an electronic search of the PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science da- tabases for articles published until March 2018. The keywords used were: ((“cleft lip"[MeSH Terms] OR (“cleft"[All Fields] AND “lip"[All Fields]) OR “cleft lip"[All Fields]) AND (“palate"[MeSH Terms] OR “palate"[All Fields]) AND (“vomer"[MeSH Terms] OR “vomer"[All Fields]) AND (“surgical flaps"[MeSH Terms] OR (“surgical"[All Fields] AND “flaps"[All Fields]) OR “surgical flaps"[All Fields] OR “flap"[All Fields])) OR ((“cleft palate"[MeSH Terms] OR (“cleft"[All Fields] AND “palate"[All Fields]) OR “cleft palate"[All Fields]) AND (“vomer"[MeSH Terms] OR “vomer"[All Fields]) AND (“surgical flaps"[MeSH Terms] OR (“surgical"[All Fields] AND “flaps"[All Fields]) OR “surgical flaps"[All Fields] OR “flap"[All Fields])). 2.4. Data collection process One author (LM) collected relevant information from the articles and a second author (CAAL) reviewed all the information collected. Careful analyses were carried out in cases of author disagreement, which were resolved through discussion with a third author (JMLG) until a consensus was reached. 2.5. Risk of bias Two investigators (LM and JMLG) assessed the methodological quality of the studies using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale (NOS) for cohort studies, which is based on three major components: selec- tion, comparability, and outcome. According to the NOS, a maximum of nine stars can be given to a study, and represents the highest quality. A score of five or fewer stars indicates a high risk of bias, while a score of six or more stars indicates a low risk of bias. In Fig. 1. Flowchart of the search strategy. 904 L. Minatel et al. / Journal of Cranio-Maxillo-Facial Surgery 47 (2019) 902e908 others were retrospective studies. 789 patients were evaluated: 2013), Wardill-Kilner (Johnston et al., 2004), two flap (Ganesh et al., 755 with complete unilateral cleft lip and palate; 12 with complete 2015; Liao et al., 2014), Sommerlad (Xu et al., 2015), bone graft bilateral cleft lip and palate; and 22 with incomplete unilateral cleft (Friede and Enemark, 2001), pushback (Tanino et al., 1997; lip. No evaluated patient had any associated syndrome (Tables 1 Melissaratou and Friede, 2002), and single flap from the non-cleft and 2). side (Rossell-Perry, 2018). One study (Fudalej et al., 2012) did not report the gender of the patients in one of the evaluated groups, while another study 3.3. Risk of bias/quality analysis of the included studies (Tanino et al., 1997) did not report the gender of any of the included patients. In all, 451 male and 253 female patients were identified.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The All-On-Four Treatment Concept: Systematic Review
    J Clin Exp Dent. 2017;9(3):e474-88. All-on-four: Systematic review Journal section: Prosthetic Dentistry doi:10.4317/jced.53613 Publication Types: Review http://dx.doi.org/10.4317/jced.53613 The all-on-four treatment concept: Systematic review David Soto-Peñaloza 1, Regino Zaragozí-Alonso 2, María Peñarrocha-Diago 3, Miguel Peñarrocha-Diago 4 1 Collaborating Lecturer, Master in Oral Surgery and Implant Dentistry, Department of Stomatology, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Valencia, Spain Peruvian Army Officer, Stomatology Department, Luis Arias Schreiber-Central Military Hospital, Lima-Perú 2 Dentist, Department of Stomatology, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Valencia, Spain 3 Assistant Professor of Oral Surgery, Stomatology Department, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Valencia, Spain 4 Professor and Chairman of Oral Surgery, Stomatology Department, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Valencia, Spain Correspondence: Unidad de Cirugía Bucal Facultat de Medicina i Odontologìa Universitat de València Gascó Oliag 1 46010 - Valencia, Spain [email protected] Soto-Peñaloza D, Zaragozí-Alonso R, Peñarrocha-Diago MA, Peñarro- cha-Diago M. The all-on-four treatment concept: Systematic review. J Clin Exp Dent. 2017;9(3):e474-88. http://www.medicinaoral.com/odo/volumenes/v9i3/jcedv9i3p474.pdf Received: 17/11/2016 Accepted: 16/12/2016 Article Number: 53613 http://www.medicinaoral.com/odo/indice.htm © Medicina Oral S. L. C.I.F. B 96689336 - eISSN: 1989-5488 eMail: [email protected] Indexed in: Pubmed Pubmed Central® (PMC) Scopus DOI® System Abstract Objectives: To systematically review the literature on the “all-on-four” treatment concept regarding its indications, surgical procedures, prosthetic protocols and technical and biological complications after at least three years in function.
    [Show full text]
  • NASAL ANATOMY Elena Rizzo Riera R1 ORL HUSE NASAL ANATOMY
    NASAL ANATOMY Elena Rizzo Riera R1 ORL HUSE NASAL ANATOMY The nose is a highly contoured pyramidal structure situated centrally in the face and it is composed by: ü Skin ü Mucosa ü Bone ü Cartilage ü Supporting tissue Topographic analysis 1. EXTERNAL NASAL ANATOMY § Skin § Soft tissue § Muscles § Blood vessels § Nerves ² Understanding variations in skin thickness is an essential aspect of reconstructive nasal surgery. ² Familiarity with blood supplyà local flaps. Individuality SKIN Aesthetic regions Thinner Thicker Ø Dorsum Ø Radix Ø Nostril margins Ø Nasal tip Ø Columella Ø Alae Surgical implications Surgical elevation of the nasal skin should be done in the plane just superficial to the underlying bony and cartilaginous nasal skeleton to prevent injury to the blood supply and to the nasal muscles. Excessive damage to the nasal muscles causes unwanted immobility of the nose during facial expression, so called mummified nose. SUBCUTANEOUS LAYER § Superficial fatty panniculus Adipose tissue and vertical fibres between deep dermis and fibromuscular layer. § Fibromuscular layer Nasal musculature and nasal SMAS § Deep fatty layer Contains the major superficial blood vessels and nerves. No fibrous fibres. § Periosteum/ perichondrium Provide nutrient blood flow to the nasal bones and cartilage MUSCLES § Greatest concentration of musclesàjunction of upper lateral and alar cartilages (muscular dilation and stenting of nasal valve). § Innervation: zygomaticotemporal branch of the facial nerve § Elevator muscles § Depressor muscles § Compressor
    [Show full text]
  • Splanchnocranium
    splanchnocranium - Consists of part of skull that is derived from branchial arches - The facial bones are the bones of the anterior and lower human skull Bones Ethmoid bone Inferior nasal concha Lacrimal bone Maxilla Nasal bone Palatine bone Vomer Zygomatic bone Mandible Ethmoid bone The ethmoid is a single bone, which makes a significant contribution to the middle third of the face. It is located between the lateral wall of the nose and the medial wall of the orbit and forms parts of the nasal septum, roof and lateral wall of the nose, and a considerable part of the medial wall of the orbital cavity. In addition, the ethmoid makes a small contribution to the floor of the anterior cranial fossa. The ethmoid bone can be divided into four parts, the perpendicular plate, the cribriform plate and two ethmoidal labyrinths. Important landmarks include: • Perpendicular plate • Cribriform plate • Crista galli. • Ala. • Ethmoid labyrinths • Medial (nasal) surface. • Orbital plate. • Superior nasal concha. • Middle nasal concha. • Anterior ethmoidal air cells. • Middle ethmoidal air cells. • Posterior ethmoidal air cells. Attachments The falx cerebri (slide) attaches to the posterior border of the crista galli. lamina cribrosa 1 crista galli 2 lamina perpendicularis 3 labyrinthi ethmoidales 4 cellulae ethmoidales anteriores et posteriores 5 lamina orbitalis 6 concha nasalis media 7 processus uncinatus 8 Inferior nasal concha Each inferior nasal concha consists of a curved plate of bone attached to the lateral wall of the nasal cavity. Each consists of inferior and superior borders, medial and lateral surfaces, and anterior and posterior ends. The superior border serves to attach the bone to the lateral wall of the nose, articulating with four different bones.
    [Show full text]
  • The Vomer Bone Analysis in Relation to Class Iii Malocclusion Using Three Dimenssional Images Analysis
    International Journal of Dental and Health Sciences Original Article Volume 04,Issue 05 THE VOMER BONE ANALYSIS IN RELATION TO CLASS III MALOCCLUSION USING THREE DIMENSSIONAL IMAGES ANALYSIS Ammar Mohi 1, Kadir Beycan2, Şebnem Erçalik Yalçinkaya3 1Postgraduate PhD researcher, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, Faculty of Dentistry, Marmara University, Istanbul, Turkey. 2Assistant professor , Department of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Marmara University, Istanbul, Turkey. 3Professor, Chairman and Head of Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, Faculty of Dentistry, Marmara University, Istanbul, Turkey. ABSTRACT: Objective: To evaluate the vomer bone dimenssional outline changes in relation to the midface hypoplasia of a Class III malocclusion by comparing with normal controls using a three dimenssional CBCT images analysis of Mimics 19.0 software. Material and Method: In total of 96 patients images were both Class III malocclusion as study cases and normal occlusion as controls with age between 15 to 30 years old. All patients were classified into three group based on ANB angular value of Steiner’s analysis. The study group were : normal, mild and sever malocclusion type groups. Linear and angular planes were determined by using 13 skeletal points and analysed by using Mimics 19.0 software. All study groups parameters statistically analysed for significant differences and correlation. Results: A high significant differences between the vomer bone anterior variables (P<0.01) followed by vomer posterior variables (P<0.05) in relation to cranial and midfacial measurements with positive correlation. The pattern of vomer bone was shown highly anterior impaction and backward inclination in sever type malocclusion group and male higher than female.
    [Show full text]
  • Nasal Cavity
    NASAL CAVITY Wedge shaped spaces; 5 cm in height, 5-7 cm in length Large inferior base- 1-5cm Narrow superior apex- 1-2 mm Anterior aperture- External nares- 1.5-2 cm ; 0.5-1 cm (flexible) posterior nasal apertures (choanae)– 2.5 by 1.3 cm (rigid) Separated from : each other- nasal septum oral cavity-hard palate cranial cavity-parts of frontal, ethmoid, sphenoid bones Lateral to nasal cavity- orbit each half- roof , floor medial wall, lateral wall three regions- vestibule respiratory region olfactory region Skeletal framework • Medial wall (nasal septum) Anterior - septal cartilage Vo m e r Perpendicular plate of ethmoid Minor contributions- nasal, frontal, sphenoid, maxilla, palatine bones • Often deflected • Lateral wall - Maxilla- anteroinferiorly Perpendicular plate of palatine Ethmoid labyrinth- superiorly & uncinate process Other bones- nasal, frontal process of maxilla, lacrimal Irregular projections- three conchae Superior concha- shortest, shallowest Middle concha- large, articulates with palatine Inferior concha- independent bone, articulates with maxilla Skeletal framework-contd. • Floor: Smooth, concave, wider than roof Palatine process of maxilla Horizontal plate of palatine (hard palate) Soft tissue • Roof: narrow, highest in the center Cribriform plate of ethmoid Anteriorly- nasal spine of frontal, nasal bones, septal cartilage, major alar cartilage Posteriorly: sphenoid, ala of vomer, palatine, medial pterygoid plate Roof is perforated by openings in the cribriform plate and a separate foramen for anterior ethmoidal Ns
    [Show full text]
  • Posteroinferior Septal Defect Due to Vomeral Malformation
    European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology (2019) 276:2229–2235 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-019-05443-3 RHINOLOGY Posteroinferior septal defect due to vomeral malformation Yong Won Lee1 · Young Hoon Yoon2 · Kunho Song2 · Yong Min Kim2 Received: 20 March 2019 / Accepted: 19 April 2019 / Published online: 25 April 2019 © Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019 Abstract Purpose Vomeral malformation may lead to a posteroinferior septal defect (PISD). It is usually found incidentally, without any characteristic symptoms. The purpose of this study was to evaluate its clinical implications. Methods In this study, we included 18 patients with PISD after reviewing paranasal sinus computed tomography scans and medical records of 2655 patients. We evaluated the shape of the hard palate and measured the distances between the anterior nasal spine (A), the posterior end of the hard palate (P), the posterior point of the vomer fused with the palate (V), the lowest margin of the vomer at P (H), and the apex of the V-notch (N). Results None of the PISD patients had a normal posterior nasal spine (PNS). Six patients lacked a PNS or had a mild depres- sion (type 1 palate), and 12 had a V-notch (type 2 palate). The mean A–P, P–H, and P–V distances were 44.5 mm, 15.3 mm, and 12.4 mm, respectively. The average P–N distance in patients with type 2 palate was 7.3 mm. There were no statistically signifcant diferences between the types of palates in A–P, P–H, or P–V distances.
    [Show full text]
  • Maxillary All-On-Four® Surgery: a Review of Intraoperative Surgical Principles and Implant Placement Strategies
    Maxillary All-on-Four® Surgery: A Review of Intraoperative Surgical Principles and Implant Placement Strategies David K. Sylvester II, DDS Assistant Clinical Professor, Department of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center Private Practice, ClearChoice Dental Implant Center, St. Louis, Mo. Ole T. Jensen DDS, MS Adjunct Professor, University of Utah School of Dentistry Thomas D. Berry, DDS, MD Private Practice, ClearChoice Dental Implant Center, Atlanta, Ga. John Pappas, DDS Private Practice, ClearChoice Dental Implant Center, St. Louis, Mo. residual bone. Advocates for additive treatment BACKGROUND attempt to procure the bone volume necessary for implant support through horizontal and vertical augmentation techniques. Graftless Implant rehabilitation of full-arch maxillary approaches seek to offer full-arch implant edentulism has undergone significant changes support through creative utilization of angled since the concept of osseointegration was first implants in existing native bone. introduced. Controversy over the ideal number of implants, axial versus angled implant Biomechanical analysis of the masticatory placement, and grafting versus graftless system repeatedly demonstrated that the treatment modalities have been subjects of greatest bite forces are located in the posterior continuous debate and evolution. Implant jaws. Anatomic limitations of bone availability supported full-arch rehabilitation of the maxilla due to atrophy and sinus pneumatization make was originally thought to be more difficult than maxillary posterior implant placement its mandibular counterpart due to lower overall challenging. The resulting controversy with bone density. regards to full-arch rehabilitation was whether prostheses with long distal cantilevers could be The foundation for any implant supported full- tolerated. If tilting posterior implants could arch rehabilitation is the underlying bone.
    [Show full text]
  • Facial Bones in Domestic Animals Nasal Bones
    FACIAL BONES IN DOMESTIC ANIMALS NASAL BONES • Horse • The posterior ends of two bones together form a notch into which the pointed anterior ends of the two frontals are received and excavated to form part of the frontal sinus. • The anterior end is pointed. • Dog • It is long and wider in front than behind. • The dorsal face is concave in its length and forms a central groove with its fellow. • The medial borders project into the nasal cavity to form the internal nasal crest. • The posterior ends resemble those of the ox. • The anterior ends form a semicircular notch • Fowl • It is small thin plate with a body and three processes-frontal, premaxillary and maxillary. • These circumscribe the anterior nares with the premaxilla and the maxilla. PREMAXILLA BONE • Horse • The bodies of the two bones are fused together. • The body of each bone is thicker and presents three alveoli for the upper incisors. • The medial surface is rough and joins the opposite bone; it presents a groove, which with a similar one of its fellow forms the foramen incisivum. • The nasal process is longer and presents at its junction with the maxillary bone an alveolus for the canine tooth. • The palatine process is wide and the palatine fissure narrow. • Dog • The body presents three alveoli for the incisors and with the maxillary bone forms an alveolus for the canine tooth. • Foramen incisivum is very small. • The palatine fissure is short but wide. PREMAXILLA BONE • Fowl • The premaxilla forms the skeleton of the upper portion of the beak and fuse to form a solid bone before hatching.
    [Show full text]
  • Ethmoid Bone, Vomer Bone, & Inferior Conchae LONG VERSION
    #7 Ethmoid bone, Vomer bone, & Inferior Conchae A E LONG VERSION Detailed Explanation Read The Ethmoid is often considered the toughest bone by Me students. Part of the reason for this is that the images are misleading…look at the accompanying images “A” and “B”. Ethmoid How can the ethmoid be in the eye orbit AND inside the bone nose? The lower image “B” is pointing at the nasal septum. This is actually the “perpendicular plate of the ethmoid” …. Remember “perpendicular” from high school geometry? These lines are “perpendicular”: B The easiest way to understand the ethmoid is to remove the nose, which is mostly cartilage. This is what your nasal cavity would look like: Note: I do not need you to ID the bone in the eye socket. I test in the C nasal cavity or cranial cavity! I have a video Most of this bony that explains stuff is ethmoid. the ethmoid CLICK HERE Follow image “D” below, following the numbers in sequence (1, 2, 3, etc.): 1 2 5 D D 4 3 Note: I can do this with my demo skull. Remove the nasal bones! Call me over if you need it! more E Notice that the ethmoid also forms most of the “nasal conchae”. These are the bumps on the later side of the nasal cavity, seen in image “E”: Follow image “F” below, following the numbers in sequence (1, 2, 3, etc.): 1 F 4 2 3 Note: I can do this with my demo skull. Remove the nasal bones! Call me over if you need it! Time for some trivia: The ethmoid bone only makes up the superior 2 conchae.
    [Show full text]
  • Management of the Post-Traumatic Nasal Deformity
    Chapter 174: Management of the Post-Traumatic Nasal Deformity Sameer Ahmed 12/14/11 Background - The nose is the most commonly injured aspect of the face in all maxillofacial injuries due to its prominence and minimal force required to induce fracture. - Traumatic nasal injury alters both the cosmetic nasal appearance and can significantly alter nasal function as well → When assessing blunt nasal trauma, both functional and aesthetic consequences must be considered - Males suffer nasal trauma about twice as often as females; highest incidence between 15 to 30 years. - Most commonly, nasal fractures occur during altercations, sports, motor vehicle and other accidents. Recent studies have shown that airbags do not reduce the incidence of nasal injuries. - Pediatric and elderly facial injuries are most often accidental. Anatomy Bony, cartilaginous, and soft tissue elements. 1. Bony framework is pyramidal - Paired nasal bones articulate with the nasal process of the frontal bone superiorly and ascending process of the maxilla laterally. - Nasal bone complex is thickest at its caudal border and thinner cephalically. 2. Paired nasal cartilages include the upper and lower laterals - The upper lateral/triangular cartilages articulate with the caudal edge of the nasal bones and with the septum medially. → Their integrity is partly responsible for the patency of the internal nasal valve. - The lower lateral/alar cartilage is responsible for the size and shape of the nasal tip. 3. The soft tissue envelope of the nose is loosely attached to the cartilaginous and bony scaffold. All arterial, venous, and nervous structures lie in the superficial plane. Anatomy The nasal septum has cartilaginous and bony components.
    [Show full text]
  • Axis Scientific 22-Part Osteopathic Natural Bone Human Skull A-105940
    Axis Scientific 22-Part Osteopathic Natural Bone Human Skull A-105940 Frontal Bone Nasal Bone Nasal Bone (Right) (Left) Frontal Bone Ethmoid Bone Parietal Bone Parietal Bone (Right) (Left) Parietal Bone Lacrimal (Right) Bone (Right) Temporal Bone Nasal Bone Temporal Bone (Left) (Right) (Right) Sphenoid Bone Lacrimal Bone (Right) Lacrimal Bone (Left) R L Zygomatic Bone Zygomatic Bone (Right) (Left) Maxilla & Teeth Maxilla & Teeth (Right Side) (Left Side) Inferior Nasal Sphenoid Bone Inferior Nasal Concha (Left) Concha (Right) Occipital Bone Temporal Bone Zygomatic Bone (Right) (Right) Maxilla & Teeth Mandible & Mandible & (Right Side) Vomer Teeth Teeth Anterior View Lateral View Parietal Bone Parietal Bone (Right) (Left) Maxilla & Teeth Maxilla & Teeth (Right Side) (Left Side) Palatine Palatine Bone (Right) Bone (Left) Zygomatic Zygomatic Bone (Left) Bone (Right) Sphenoid Bone R L L R Vomer Temporal Bone Temporal Bone Temporal Bone (Right) (Left) (Right) Temporal Bone (Left) Parietal Bone Parietal Bone (Left) (Right) Occipital Bone Occipital Bone Mandible & Teeth Inferior View Posterior View Parietal Bone Frontal Bone Parietal Bone (Right) (Left) Parietal Bone Parietal Bone (Right) (Left) Temporal Temporal Bone (Right) Bone (Left) Temporal Bone Temporal Bone (Right) (Left) A Frontal Bone R L C B Sphenoid Sphenoid Sphenoid Bone Bone Bone Occipital Bone D E F Zygomatic Bone (Right) Zygomatic G Bone (Left) Lacrimal Bone (Right) Mandible & Maxilla & Teeth Maxilla & Teeth Maxilla & Teeth Teeth (Right Side) (Left Side) Maxilla & Teeth (Left Side)
    [Show full text]
  • Skull. Sphenoid and Ethmoid Bones
    Skull. Sphenoid and Ethmoid bones PhD., Dr. David Lendvai Department of Anatomy, Histology and Embriology Semmelweis University, Faculty of Medicine 2018. Skeletal system Structure of the skull Border between viscerocrainum and neurocranium Calvaria Main parts of the skull •Constitute by 22 bones: •neurocranium (8) – UNPAIRED: frontal, occipital, sphenoid, ethmoid bones PAIRED: temporal, parietal bones •viscerocranium (14) -UNPAIRED: mandibule, vomer. PAIRED: nasal, maxilla, zygomatic, lacrimal, palatine, inferior nasal concha Their role – formation of cavities, protect viscera, voice formation, initial portions of the gastrointerstinal and respiratory systems, insertion of muscles (mascication, head movements) Cavities: - Cranial cavity, - Nasal cavity, - Paranasal sinuses - Oral cavity, - Orbit, - (Tympanic cavity, Inner ear) Connections between cranial bones • Synchondrosis, synostosis (cartilagineal and bony connections) • Sutures – Coronal – Sagittal – Lambdoid Calvaria and the base of the skull Calvaria External aspect of the calvaria Base of the skull Internal aspect of the calvaria Fossae cranii Anterior cranial fossa MIddle cranial fossa Posterior cranial fossa • Posterior cranial fossa: • Anterior cranial fossa: • Occipital, temporal bones, frontal, ethmoid, lesser wings parietal bones of sphenoid • Middle cranial fossa: sphenoid, temporal bones, parietal bones Bones of the neurocranium Parietal bone Frontal bone Temporal bone Ethmoid Sphenoid Sphenoid bone Braus Part of the external skull base (- body (Corpus), pterygoid process,
    [Show full text]