Distraction osteogenesis in the surgical treatment of craniostenosis: a comparison of internal and external craniofacial distractor devices.

Distraction osteogenesis in the surgical treatment of craniostenosis: a comparison of internal and external craniofacial distractor devices. Research Abstract Details 

Research Abstract Table of Contents

Jump to the:

Distraction osteogenesis in the surgical treatment of craniostenosis: a comparison of internal and external craniofacial distractor devices. Abstract Text:

S Pelo,G Gasparini,A Di Petrillo,G Tamburrini,C Di Rocco,

PURPOSE: To compare the practical difficulties of external and internal craniofacial distraction devices used in craniofacial advancement in terms of technical surgical limitations and patients' discomfort. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study involved analysis of the pertinent literature and personal experience on the treatment of patients affected with syndromic craniosynostoses treated with craniofacial distraction advancement. RESULTS: One hundred patients who underwent internal craniofacial distraction were analyzed. This kind of distraction device was found to be adequately tolerated by the patients with regards to physical and psychological aspects. They had relatively little impact on day-life activities. However, a significant drawback of this type of device is represented by the difficulty in controlling the vectors of distraction. Thirty-eight patients were analyzed after having received the implantation of an external craniofacial distraction device. This type of instrumentation was found to have a significant psychological impact and important limitation on recreational activities. External devices, however, offered important advantages in the control of the vectors of distraction, which could be modified according to the patient's needs during the perioperative and early postoperative clinical course. There were no significant differences among the two types of devices with regard to osteogenesis and degree of facial advancement. CONCLUSION: Both internal and external devices are effective in distraction craniofacial advancement. However, significant differences do exist concerning the surgical aspects and the practical difficulties experienced by the patients.

Distraction osteogenesis in the surgical treatment of craniostenosis: a comparison of internal and external craniofacial distractor devices. Publishing Authors By Initials

S Pelo,G Gasparini,A Di Petrillo,G Tamburrini,C Di Rocco,

For similar abstracts research abstracts see: abstracts research

PUBMED ID PMID:

MEDLINE DATE:

Distraction osteogenesis in the surgical treatment of craniostenosis: a comparison of internal and external craniofacial distractor devices. Journal Published:

PUBLICATION TYPE: Journal Article

Journal: Child's nervous system : ChNS : official journal o

VOLUME: 23

Page Numbers: 1447-53

Journal Abbreviation:

ISSN: 0256-7040

DAY: 18

MONTH: 09

YEAR: 2007

Distraction osteogenesis in the surgical treatment of craniostenosis: a comparison of internal and external craniofacial distractor devices. Information

Number of References:

LANGUAGE: eng

NlmUniqueID: 8503227

Distraction osteogenesis in the surgical treatment of craniostenosis: a comparison of internal and external craniofacial distractor devices. Keywords Mesh Terms:

KEYWORDS:

MESH TERMS:

Chemical & Substance for Abstract: Distraction osteogenesis in the surgical treatment of craniostenosis: a comparison of internal and external craniofacial distractor devices. Information

Substance Name:

Registry Number:

Grant and Affiliation Information for Distraction osteogenesis in the surgical treatment of craniostenosis: a comparison of internal and external craniofacial distractor devices.

AFFILIATION: Maxillofacial Surgery Unit, Catholic University Medical School, Rome, Italy.

Country: Germany

AGENCY:

GRANT:

ACRONYM:

MEDLINETA: Childs Nerv Syst

REFSOURCE:

DATABASENAME:

ACCESSION NUMBER:

Number Hits: 0

Distraction osteogenesis in the surgical treatment of craniostenosis: a comparison of internal and external craniofacial distractor devices Related Publications

• "Coming back".
• Brain malformation in syndromic craniosynostoses, a primary disorder of white matter: a review.
• CSF otorrhea after anterior temporal craniotomy due to hyperpneumatization of the temporal bone.
• Commentary.
• Dandy Walker variant and persistent occipital sinus at the museum La Specola in Florence.
• Depressed skull fractures and epidural hematoma from head fixation with pins for craniotomy in children.
• Distraction osteogenesis in the surgical treatment of craniostenosis: a comparison of internal and external craniofacial distractor devices.
• Effectiveness of a limited invasive scalp approach in the correction of sagittal craniosynostosis.
• Effectiveness of hemispherectomy in hemimegalencephaly with intractable seizures.
• Epilepsy associated with shaken baby syndrome.
• Frederick sandys: rosamund, queen of the lombards.
• HIV myelopathy.
• Intensity ratios of H lines: departures from the ideal conditions in the range of laser-induced breakdown spectroscopy experiments.
• L-Dopa infusion does not improve explicit sequence learning in Parkinson's disease.
• Management of optic-hypothalamic gliomas in children: still a challenging problem.
• Patient-controlled analgesia with fentanil and midazolam in children with postoperative neurosurgical pain.
• Radiation-induced brain tumours after central nervous system irradiation in childhood: a review.
• Retrieval of ventricular catheter with the aid of endoscopy.
• Sylvian fissure arachnoid cysts: a survey on their diagnostic workout and practical management.
• The natural history of the Chiari Type I anomaly.