You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT ARCHIVES
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 116 No. 5, May 1990 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  Archives
  •  Online Features
  EXPEDITED PUBLICATION
 This Article
 •References
 •Full text PDF
 • Reply to article
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Citation map
 •Citing articles on HighWire
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Similar articles in this journal
 Social Bookmarking
  Add to CiteULike Add to Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Add to Digg Add to Reddit Add to Technorati Add to Twitter What's this?

Segmental Mandibular Regeneration by Distraction Osteogenesis

An Experimental Study

Peter D. Costantino, MD; George Shybut, MD; Craig D. Friedman, MD; Harold J. Pelzer, DDS, MD; Michael Masini, MD; Maise L. Shindo, MD; George A. Sisson, Sr, MD

Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1990;116(5):535-545.


Abstract

• We report the use of distraction osteogenesis for segmental mandibular regeneration. This technique has been used in thousands of patients in the Soviet Union to regenerate as much as 30 cm of tubular bone in the extremities. However, we are unaware of previous experimental or clinical reports of segmental mandibular regeneration by distraction osteogenesis. In a canine model, 2.5-cm segmental mandibular defects were filled with regenerate bone in 25 days at a rate of 1.0 mm/d using bifocal distraction osteogenesis. The diameters of the regenerate segments were comparable with preexisting mandi

ble, and all animals resumed normal oromandibular function following regeneration. The regenerate bone was evaluated radiographically, angiographically, and histologically. In the control group without distraction osteogenesis, the segmental defects failed to fill with regenerate bone. The theoretical basis for distraction osteogenesis, a detailed description of the technique, and a review of previous studies on experimental mandibular lengthening are presented.

(Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1990;116:535-545)



Author Affiliations

From the Departments of Otolaryngology—Head and Neck Surgery (Drs Costantino, Pelzer, Shindo, and Sisson) and Orthopedic Surgery (Drs Shybut and Masini), Northwestern University Medical School and Northwestern Memorial Hospital, Chicago, Ill, and the Section of Otolaryngology, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Conn (Dr Friedman).


Footnotes

Accepted for publication January 15, 1990.

Presented at the Society of Air Force Clinical Surgeons 38th Annual Symposium, Bethesda, Md, April 3, 1989.

Reprint requests to the Department of Otolaryngology—Head and Neck Surgery, Northwestern University Medical School, 707 N Fairbanks, Suite 922, Chicago, IL 60611 (Dr Costantino).



Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter     What's this?

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Effect of Radiation on Segmental Distraction Osteogenesis in Rabbits
Price et al.
Arch Facial Plast Surg 2008;10:159-163.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

The Versatility of Distraction Osteogenesis in Craniofacial Surgery
Imola et al.
Arch Facial Plast Surg 2002;4:8-19.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Distraction Osteogenesis for Reconstruction of Mandibular Symphyseal Defects
Annino et al.
Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1994;120:911-916.
ABSTRACT  

Experimental Mandibular Regrowth by Distraction Osteogenesis: Long-term Results
Costantino et al.
Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1993;119:511-516.
ABSTRACT  





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 1990 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.