Cargando…

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

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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Tahmasbi, Soodeh, Jamilian, Abdolreza, Showkatbakhsh, Rahman, Pourdanesh, Fereydoun, Behnaz, Mohammad
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6089043/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30147405
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/ejd.ejd_374_17
Descripción
Sumario: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.