scholarly journals Cephalometric changes in nasopharyngeal area after anterior maxillary segmental distraction versus Le Fort I osteotomy in patients with cleft lip and palate

2018 ◽  
Vol 12 (03) ◽  
pp. 393-397 ◽  
Author(s):  
Soodeh Tahmasbi ◽  
Abdolreza Jamilian ◽  
Rahman Showkatbakhsh ◽  
Fereydoun Pourdanesh ◽  
Mohammad Behnaz
Keyword(s):  
Cleft Lip ◽  
Cleft Lip And Palate ◽  
Le Fort I Osteotomy ◽  
Le Fort ◽  
Surgical Methods ◽  
Lateral Cephalograms ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Group B ◽  
Cephalometric Changes ◽  
Le Fort I

ABSTRACT Objective: The present study was designed to compare the effects of two surgical methods, anterior maxillary segmental distraction (AMSD) versus conventional Le Fort I osteotomy, on cephalometric changes of velopharyngeal area of patients with cleft lip and palate. Materials and Methods: This study was conducted on 20 CLP in two groups. The first group had classic Le Fort I maxillary advancement and the second group had AMSD with a modified hyrax as an intraoral tooth-borne distractor. In the second group, 1 week after the surgery, activation of hyrax screw was started with the rate of 2 times a day for about 10 days. Initial and final lateral cephalograms were traced and analyzed by OrthoSurgerX software. Results: The changes in variables evaluating velopharyngeal status showed a significant difference between the two groups. In Group A (conventional), the mean of nasopharyngeal area and Nasopharynx floor length showed a significant increase (P < 0.05) after the surgery, while in Group B (DO), the trend of changes was vice-versa. The changes in SNA, overjet, and soft-tissue convexity were similar in both groups. Conclusion: AMSD can improve facial profile, almost similar to the conventional Le Fort I advancement, while there is a significant decrease in nasopharyngeal; hereby there is no increase in the velopharyngeal sphincter.

Evaluation of Lefort I Osteotomy Line and Pterygomaxillary Junction Region in Patients With Cleft Lip and Palate

2020 ◽  
pp. 105566562096957
Author(s):  
Bahadır Sancar ◽  
Şuayip Burak Duman
Keyword(s):  
Cleft Lip ◽  
Cleft Lip And Palate ◽  
Class Iii ◽  
Class Iii Malocclusion ◽  
Le Fort I Osteotomy ◽  
Maxillary Hypoplasia ◽  
Le Fort ◽  
Osteotomy Line ◽  
Le Fort I ◽  
Pterygomaxillary Junction

Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the Le Fort I osteotomy line and pterygomaxillary junction via cone-beam computed tomography in individuals with cleft lip and palate (CLP). Design: Retrospective study. Patients and Methods: The study included individuals older than 16 years with CLP, who were scheduled for repositioning of the maxilla by Le Fort I osteotomy, and those with class III malocclusion with maxillary hypoplasia, who were scheduled for Le Fort I osteotomy. The measurements made in the area of the cleft of individuals with CLP were compared with both the side with no cleft and those with class III malocclusion with maxillary hypoplasia. A total of 11 measurements were made on the axial section parallel to the Frankfurt Horizontal plane, corresponding to the lower 1/5 of the distance between the infraorbital foramen and the anterior nasal spine. Results: There were significant differences both in the comparisons made between the individuals with CLP and those without CLP in terms of the canal-anterior alveolar crest (G) and sinus-anterior alveolar crest (L) measurements ( P < .05). The mean measurement values showed that the measurement results were higher in individuals with CLP in general. Conclusion: In conclusion, we believe that there might be difficulties both in osteotomy and down fracture stages during Le Fort I osteotomies performed in individuals with CLP.

Traumatic Arteriovenous Malformation following Maxillary Le Fort I Osteotomy

2008 ◽  
Vol 45 (3) ◽  
pp. 329-331 ◽  
Author(s):  
I. M. Smith ◽  
P. J. Anderson ◽  
M. J. Wilks ◽  
D. J. David
Keyword(s):  
Arteriovenous Malformation ◽  
Cleft Lip ◽  
Cleft Lip And Palate ◽  
Rare Complication ◽  
Le Fort I Osteotomy ◽  
Le Fort ◽  
Le Fort I

Objective: Complications following maxillary Le Fort I osteotomy are rare. The authors present the rare complication of an arteriovenous malformation following such a procedure in a 25-year-old woman with a cleft lip and palate that was treated successfully with radiologically guided embolization.

scholarly journals A Case Report of Adult Unilateral Cleft Lip and Palate Treated with Closure of Wide Alveolar Cleft by le Fort I Osteotomy

2010 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 258-265
Author(s):  
AYA HONDA ◽  
YOSHIYUKI BABA ◽  
KEIICHI KATAOKA ◽  
SHOICHI SUZUKI ◽  
KEIICHI MORITA ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Case Report ◽  
Cleft Lip ◽  
Cleft Lip And Palate ◽  
Le Fort I Osteotomy ◽  
Le Fort ◽  
Alveolar Cleft ◽  
Le Fort I

Apples and Oranges—Midface Hypoplasia and the Le Fort I Osteotomy in Cleft Lip and Palate Patients: A Classification Scheme and Treatment Protocol

2009 ◽  
Vol 46 (6) ◽  
pp. 613-620 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jacobo Felemovicius ◽  
Jesse A. Taylor
Keyword(s):  
Analysis Of Variance ◽  
Cleft Lip ◽  
Cleft Lip And Palate ◽  
Treatment Protocol ◽  
Case Series ◽  
Le Fort I Osteotomy ◽  
Le Fort ◽  
Midface Hypoplasia ◽  
Le Fort I ◽  
Relapse Rates

Objective: To present a classification and treatment protocol for cleft lip and palate patients with midface hypoplasia. Design: Retrospective case series. Setting: Craniofacial center. Patients: The study included 133 patients with cleft lip and palate and maxillary hypoplasia treated with Le Fort I osteotomy between January 2000 and July 2006. Interventions: Modified Le Fort I osteotomy. Patients were divided into three groups based on the number of free-standing bony maxillary segments, and treatment was tailored to their deformity. Main Outcome Measures: Complications and long-term relapse rates. Results: The 133 patients underwent 142 operations with mean follow-up of 27 months. Mean horizontal advancement was 7.1 ± 1.9 mm, 6.5 ± 1.3 mm, 6.4 ± 1.6 mm, and 6.5 ± 1.3 mm for groups I, II, IIIA, and IIIB, respectively. Complications consisted of nine bony relapses, three hematomas, and two transitory neurosensory losses. Analysis of variance using number of maxillary pieces as the independent variable and millimeters of advancement as the dependent variable demonstrated no difference in the amounts that the groups were advanced (p  =  .23). Relapse rates for groups I, II, IIIA, and IIIB were 2/62 (3.2%), 5/53 (9.4%), 2/14 (14.3%), and 0/4 (0.0%), respectively. Analysis of variance did not demonstrate a statistical difference in relapse rates based on number of maxillary pieces. Conclusions: Cleft lip and palate patients can be classified into three groups based on the number of maxillary segments. Our classification system defines the differences among this diverse group of patients and also facilitates unique treatment of each group.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document