Karaniofasial Osteodistraksiyonun Tarihsel Gelişimi ve Kademeli Traksiyonun Dokular Üzerine Etkisi
Synopsis
Kraniyofasiyal osteodistraksiyon geçtiğimiz yüzyıldan itibaren her geçen gün daha fazla dikkatleri üzerine çekmiştir. İlk uygulamalar genellikle maksiller ekspansiyona yönelik iken ilerleyen çalışmalar geniş gelişimsel kraniyofasiyal hipoplazileri tedavi edebilecek boyutlara ulaşmıştır.
Kraniyofasiyal osteodistraksiyon konvansiyonel cerrahi tekniklere göre avantajları her zaman cazip gelmiştir. Osteodistraksiyon tekniğinin temel avantajlarında birisi, konvansiyonel cerrahilerde akut harekete maruz kalan dokuların adaptasondaki zorluklarını içermemesidir. Bu teknikte kademeli olarak gerilen konumu değişen dokuların, şekil, fonksiyon ve hücresel sayı değişiklikleriyle adaptasyon sağlayabilmesidir. Bu adaptasyon istenen fonksiyonların hedefe daha yakın olmasını sağlamakta, relaps oranlarını minimalize etmektedir.
Çalışmamızda karaniofasial osteodistraksiyonun tarihsel gelişimi hakkında ve kademeli traksiyonun dokular üzerine etkisi hakkındaki bilgileri derlemeyi amaçladık.
Craniofacial osteodistraction has increasingly captured attention since the last century. While initial applications were generally aimed at maxillary expansion, subsequent studies have reached dimensions capable of treating extensive developmental craniofacial hypoplasias.
The advantages of craniofacial osteodistraction over conventional surgical techniques have always been appealing. One of the fundamental advantages of osteodistraction is that it does not involve the challenges of adaptation faced by tissues exposed to acute movement in conventional surgeries. In this technique, tissues undergoing gradually applied tension can adapt through changes in shape, function, and cellular count. This adaptation helps achieve closer alignment of desired functions, minimizing relapse rates.
In our study, we aimed to compile information about the historical development of craniofacial osteodistraction and the effects of gradual traction on tissues.
References
Cope JB, Samchukov ML, Cherkashin AM . Historical developmentand evaluation of craniofacial distraction osteogenesis. In: Samchukov ML, Cherkashin AM, Cope JB (Eds). Craniofacial Distraction Osteogenesis, Mosby, İnc., St Louis, Missouri, 2001. p. 3-18.
Limberg AA Treatment of open bite by means of plastic oblique osteotomy of the ascending rami of the mandible. Dent Cosmos, 1925; 67: 1191-1197.
Köle H. Surgical operations on the alveolar ridge to correct occlusal abnormalities. Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathology. 1959; 12 (5): 515-529.
Trotman CA, McNamara Jr JA. Distraction osteogenesis and tissue engineering. Ann Arbor, Michigan. Center for Human Growth and Development The University of Michigan, 1998.
Keçeli H G, Demiralp B, Muhtaroğulları M, et al. Distraksiyon Osteogenez: Yeni Kemik Formasyonu, Tarihçe ve Biyolojik Prensipler: Bölüm 1. Hacettepe Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi dergisi. 2006; 30 (1): 31-41
Makarov MR, Samchukov ML, Cope JB et al. The effect of gradual traction on skeletal muscle. In: Samchukov ML, Cherkashin AM, Cope JB (Eds). Craniofacial Distraction Osteogenesis, Mosby, İnc., St Louis, Missouri, 2001. p. 75-87
Swennen G, Schliephake H, Dempf R, et al. Craniofacial distraction osteogenesis: a review of the literature. Part 1: clinical studies. International journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery, 2001, 30 (2): 89-103.
McCarthy JG, Schreiber J, Karp N, et al. Lengthening the human mandible by gradual distraction. Plastic and reconstructive surgery, 1992; 89(1): 1-8.
Keçeli HG, Demiralp B, Muhtaroğulları M et al. Dişhekimliğinde Distraksiyon Osteogenezi: Bölüm 2. Hacettepe Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi dergisi, 2006; 30 (2): 20-30
Guerrissi, J., Ferrentino, G., Margulies, D et al. Lengthening of the mandible by distraction osteogenesis: experimental work in rabbits. The Journal of craniofacial surgery, 1994; 5(5): 313-317.
Fisher E, Staffenberg DA, McCarthy JG, et al. Histopathologic and biochemical changes in the muscles affected by distraction osteogenesis of the mandible. Plastic and reconstructive surgery, 1997; 99(2): 366-371.
Samchukov ML, Chercashin M, Makarov MR. Muscle adaptation during single and double level lenghtening. İn: Proceedings of Societe İnternational Recherche Orthoedique et de Traumatologie (SIROT) 8th World Triennial Congress, 1999 Sydney, Austuralia,
Simpson AH, Williams PE, Kyberd P, et al. The response of muscle to leg lengthening. The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery British Volume, 1995; 77(4): 630-636.
Djasim UM, Wolvius EB, Van Neck JW, et al. Single versus triple daily activation of the distractor: No significant effects of frequency of distraction on bone regenerate quantity and architecture. Journal of Cranio-Maxillofacial Surgery, 2008; 36(3): 143-151.
Makarov M, Samchukov M, Cope JB. The effect of gradual traction on peripheral nerves. In: Samchukov ML, Cherkashin AM, Cope JB (Eds). Craniofacial Distraction Osteogenesis, Mosby, İnc., St Louis, Missouri, 2001. p. 89-101
Barkate HE. Orthognathic surgery by distraction osteogenesis: a literature review. Dentistry (American Student Dental Association) 1997; 17(3): 14-18.
Makarov MR, Harper RP, Cope JB, et al. Evaluation of inferior alveolar nerve function during distraction osteogenesis in the dog. Journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery, 1998; 56(12): 1417-1423.
Samchukov ML, Cherkashin AM and Cope JB. Distraction osteogenesis: History and biologic basis of new bone formation In: Lynch SE, Genco RJ, Mark RE, (Eds). Tissue engineering: Applications in maxillofacial surgery and periodontics. Quintessence, 1998. p. 130-148.
Samchukov ML, Cope B. The effect of gradual traction on the periodontal ligament. In: Samchukov ML, Cherkashin AM, Cope JB (Eds). Craniofacial Distraction Osteogenesis, Mosby, İnc., St Louis, Missouri, 2002. p. 110-117
Krause-Lösler B, Ulrich J, Meyer T, et al. Temporomandibular joint aterations during distraction osteogenesis. In: Samchukov ML, Cherkashin AM, Cope JB (Eds). Craniofacial Distraction Osteogenesis, Mosby, İnc., St Louis, Missouri, 2001. p. 118-127
