Le Fort III Distraction: Part I. Controlling Position and Vectors of the Midface Segment

Background: The purpose of this investigation was to determine the response of the osteotomized Le Fort III midface bony segment to variations in the location and direction, or vector, of force application on using the rigid external distraction device. Methods: This retrospective study involved 18 consecutive syndromic craniosynostotic patients (average age, 5.7 years) who underwent Le Fort III midface advancement distraction. Various cephalometric and novel landmarks, located on the mobilized Le Fort III segment and on the components of the distraction device, were identified before activation and at mid-activation. The direction and magnitude of change for these points were recorded. Results: Based on the observed change in the position of the midface during distraction, the sample was divided into the following groups. In group 1 (n = 5), the Le Fort III segment translated forward and no rotation was noted. In group 2 (n = 3), the Le Fort III segment rotated clockwise and showed downward displacement. In group 3 (n = 6), the Le Fort III segment showed forward displacement and rotated counterclockwise. In group 4 (n = 4), the Le Fort III segment translated forward and downward. Conclusions: Direction of movement and resultant change in position of the Le Fort III segment during distraction are directly related to the location and direction of force application. Translation forward, with minimal rotation, was achieved when the force was applied at a location 55 percent above the occlusal plane (between the occlusal plane and the nasion) and in a direction parallel to the maxillary occlusal plane.

[1]  J. McCarthy,et al.  Midterm Follow-Up of Midface Distraction for Syndromic Craniosynostosis: A Clinical and Cephalometric Study , 2007, Plastic and reconstructive surgery.

[2]  S. Baek,et al.  Comparison of Treatment Outcome and Stability Between Distraction Osteogenesis and LeFort I Osteotomy in Cleft Patients With Maxillary Hypoplasia , 2007, The Journal of craniofacial surgery.

[3]  E. Ko,et al.  Long-term Follow-up after Maxillary Distraction Osteogenesis in Growing Children with Cleft Lip and Palate , 2007, The Cleft palate-craniofacial journal : official publication of the American Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Association.

[4]  S. Uckan,et al.  Vector alignment in maxillary distraction osteogenesis. , 2006, The Journal of craniofacial surgery (Print).

[5]  J. Fearon Halo Distraction of the Le Fort III in Syndromic Craniosynostosis: A Long-Term Assessment , 2005, Plastic and reconstructive surgery.

[6]  Michael J. Seelinger,et al.  "Cat's cradle" midfacial fixation in distraction osteogenesis after Le Fort III osteotomy. , 2004, The Journal of craniofacial surgery.

[7]  B. Kalantarian,et al.  Rotation Advancement of the Midface by Distraction Osteogenesis , 2003, Plastic and reconstructive surgery.

[8]  Ravindra Nanda,et al.  Effect of varying the force direction on maxillary orthopedic protraction. , 2009, The Angle orthodontist.

[9]  O. Keith Contemporary orthodontics , 2002, Morecambe Bay Medical Journal.

[10]  J. Fearon The Le Fort III Osteotomy: To Distract or Not to Distract? , 2001, Plastic and reconstructive surgery.

[11]  A. Figueroa,et al.  Biomechanical considerations in distraction of the osteotomized dentomaxillary complex. , 1999, American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics : official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics.

[12]  H. Legan,et al.  A reexamination of various extraoral appliances in light of recent research findings. , 1999, Angle Orthodontist.

[13]  B. Toth,et al.  Distraction of the Midface , 1999 .

[14]  B. Toth,et al.  Le Fort III Advancement with Gradual Distraction Using Internal Devices , 1997, Plastic and reconstructive surgery.

[15]  D. Hemmy,et al.  Frontofacial osteotomies, advancement, and remodeling by distraction: an extended application of the technique. , 1997, The Journal of craniofacial surgery.

[16]  D. J. Rudolph,et al.  A study of holographic interferometry on the initial reaction of maxillofacial complex during protraction. , 1997, American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics : official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics.

[17]  A. Figueroa,et al.  Management of severe maxillary deficiency in childhood and adolescence through distraction osteogenesis with an external, adjustable, rigid distraction device. , 1997, The Journal of craniofacial surgery.

[18]  J. McCarthy,et al.  Midface Distraction Advancement in the Canine Without Osteotomies , 1995, Annals of plastic surgery.

[19]  S J Chaconas,et al.  Biomechanical effects of maxillary protraction on the craniofacial complex. , 1987, American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics : official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics.

[20]  F W Pirruccello,et al.  Plastic and reconstructive surgery. , 1967, IMJ. Illinois medical journal.