Takashi Hirakawa

A novel craniofacial osteogenesis distraction system enabling control of distraction distance and vector for the treatment of syndromic craniosynostosis.

BackgroundDistraction osteogenesis is now an important clinical tool in craniofacial surgery. However, controlling the distance and vector of distraction in infants with syndromic craniosynostosis with good repeatability is a task that still proves difficult today. We have developed a new facial osteogenesis distraction system that combines the advantages of external and internal distraction devices to enable control of both the distraction distance and vector. This article describes the method and short-term results of this system. MethodsOur distraction system uses both a conventional external distraction device and a newly developed internal distraction device. Postoperative control of the distraction vector is performed using the external device, whereas control of distraction distance is done with the adjustable-angle internal device. This system was used for 2 patients with Crouzon syndrome. ResultsThe system enabled control of lengthening distance and vector, and no complications occurred during the procedures. ConclusionsWe developed a facial distraction system leveraging the advantages of external and internal distraction devices, which we then used to successfully control both lengthening distance and vector. The system would be particularly indicated in patients with severe scarring due to multiple follow-up surgeries and in patients requiring distraction of 20 mm or more. Aligning the periorbital profile at 5 to 6 years old caused the maxilla to rotate counterclockwise, and we consider that a procedure combining Le Fort III osteotomy with Le Fort I and II osteotomies is required to prevent these rotations.

Primary alveolar bone grafting and gingivoperiosteoplasty or gingivomucoperiosteal flap at the time of 1-stage repair of unilateral cleft lip and palate.

It takes quite a long time to finish treating patients with cleft lip and palate. Usually, lip closure, palate repair, secondary alveolar bone grafting, and secondary repair of lip/nose have been given to patients at appropriate time according to their growth. However, these series of surgical interventions impose a considerable burden on the patients and their families. As for palate repair, it is considered that the earlier the better for the sake of speech, but it should be delayed to approximately 1½ years of age for maxillary growth. However, we have developed a palate repair technique that will hardly result in marked maxillary growth impairment by modifying the Furlow method, so we have become able to perform palate repair between 3 and 10 months after birth. Accordingly, we can perform lip and palate repair simultaneously, which have been performed separately. As we have developed a 1-stage repair of cleft lip and palate including primary alveolar bone grafting from nasal concha and/or hard plate and gingivoperiosteoplasty or gingivomucoperiosteal flap, we report on our technique and treatment outcome.

A osteogenesis distraction device enabling control of vertical direction for syndromic craniosynostosis.

Background: We have developed a hybrid facial osteogenesis distraction system that combines the advantages of external and internal distraction devices to enable control of both the distraction distance and vector. However, when the advanced maxilla has excessive clockwise rotation and shifts more downward vertically than planned, it might be impossible to pull it up to correct it. We invented devices attached to external distraction systems that can control the vertical vector of distraction to resolve this problem. The purpose of this article is to describe the result of utilizing the distraction system for syndromic craniosynostosis. Methods: In addition to a previously reported hybrid facial distraction system, the devices for controlling the vertical direction of the advanced maxilla were attached to the external distraction device. The vertical direction of the advanced maxilla can be controlled by adjustment of the spindle units. This system was used for 2 patients with Crouzon and Apert syndrome. Results: The system enabled control of the vertical distance, with no complications during the procedures. As a result, the maxilla could be advanced into the planned position including overcorrection without excessive clockwise rotation of distraction. Conclusion: Our system can alter the cases and bring them into the planned position, by controlling the vertical vector of distraction. We believe that this system might be effective in infants with syndromic craniosynostosis as it involves 2 osteotomies and horizontal and vertical direction of elongation can be controlled.

The Folded Buccal Musculomucosal Flap for Large Palatal Fistulae in Cleft Palate

Background: A palatal fistula is a common complication of cleft palate repair. Although a buccal musculomucosal flap (BMMF) is effective for fistula repair, it does have the following problems: a second operation may be required to release the pedicle on the oral side and unilateral BMMF cannot close mucosal defects of both the nasal and oral sides. A novel fistula closure method using the folded BMMF (f-BMMF) invented by the authors is presented. Case: A 8-year-old-boy with bilateral cleft lip and palate with anencephaly. A fistula in the hard palate occurred after palatoplasty by the Furlow method, and an f-BMMF was planned. The mucosal defects of the nasal and oral sides were covered by 2 separate islands of mucosal epithelium. Finally, no reoperation was needed to remove the pedicle of the f-BMMF. Conclusion: The f-BMMF is able to cover both sides without a raw surface and a mucosal graft even in cases of large fistula closure, although BMMF cannot usually cover both oral and nasal sides of a fistula. The advantages of this procedure are that it does not require second surgery to release the pedicle and that its distal island mucosa can be used to monitor engraftment. This proposed method seems to be an appealing alternative.

Primary Palatoplasty for Unilateral Cleft Lip and Palate Using Mucosal Grafts and Flaps.

The mucosal graft and flaps method (MG method) is a palatoplasty technique that was developed for the purpose of improving maxillary growth in patients with cleft palate. In the MG method, full-thickness buccal mucosa is grafted onto the raw surface created by pushback palatoplasty. The method is unlikely to result in severe scarring and has a favorable effect on maxillary growth. In addition, it is unlikely to result in oronasal fistula and provides good speech results. Overall, postive long-term treatment results have been obtained. Although the MG method is technically difficult and requires a lengthy surgery, the technique is considered to be effective for palate closure in terms of speech and maxillary growth.

Transmaxillary Sinus Approach for Le Fort II Osteotomy.

Summary: The Le Fort II osteotomy is a relatively rare operation. The posterior wall osteotomy of the maxillary sinus (MS) is often difficult for Le Fort III. We developed the transmaxillary sinus approach (TSA) for the Le Fort II osteotomy that cuts the posterior wall of the MS directly. This report illustrates this easy-to-use procedure for the Le Fort II osteotomy in syndromic craniosynostosis. This procedure was performed in an 18-year-old patient with Apert syndrome and a 15-year-old patient with Pfeiffer syndrome. The thin anterior walls of the MS were removed through an intraoral approach to look inside the MS. Then, the posterior walls were cut by chisel under direct vision using light. The other osteotomy was performed as usual. Distraction osteogenesis with internal and external devices was used in combination. The advantages of TSA are the direct posterior wall osteotomy of the MS with no down fracture and minimal invasiveness to the mucosa of the MS under direct vision. However, the disadvantage is that TSA becomes a blind procedure in a case with no MS or hypoplasia. We developed the TSA for the Le Fort II osteotomy, which could provide direct observation and perform the posterior wall osteotomy of the MS without down fracture. We believe that TSA is an effective surgical procedure for the Le Fort II osteotomy.

Maxillary growth after maxillary protraction: Appliance in conjunction with presurgical orthopedics, gingivoperiosteoplasty, and Furlow palatoplasty for complete bilateral cleft lip and palate patients with protruded premaxilla.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS In bilateral cleft lip and palate (BCLP) with premaxillary protrusion, a good outcome with adequate maxillary development is difficult to achieve. The purpose of this article is to evaluate the maxillary growth after using presurgical orthopedics (PSO), gingivoperiosteoplasty (GPP), Furlow palatoplasty, and maxillary protraction appliance (MPA) for BCLP with premaxillary protrusion. PATIENTS AND METHODS Seven patients with complete BCLP with premaxillary protrusion were treated by PSO, cheiloplasty, GPP, and Furlow palatoplasty. MPA was used as part of the protocol for 6 months to 1 year for postoperative retardation of maxillary growth cases. Maxillary growth was evaluated by cephalometric analysis at 4 and 10 years of age, and bone formation at the alveolar cleft was evaluated by computed tomography (CT) imaging at 5 years of age. RESULTS At 4 years of age, three of seven patients had apparent retardation of maxillary growth. The maxillary growth at 10 years of age was equivalent to the average value of normal Japanese after using MPA in three cases. At 5 years of age, only two of seven patients showed sufficient bone formation at the alveolar cleft to avoid alveolar bone grafting (ABG). Subsequently, ABG was performed in five patients. DISCUSSION Although three of seven patients had apparent crossbite at 4 years of age, the maxillary growth of all patients at 10 years of age was approximately equivalent to the average value of normal Japanese after using MPA. A treatment protocol based on PSO, GPP, Furlow palatoplasty, and MPA may be an option, but long-term growth is unknown.

Maxillary growth after the use of protraction head gear in conjunction with presurgical orthopedics and gingivoperiosteoplasty for complete bilateral cleft lip and alveolus patients.

Introduction Maxillary development is often inadequate in bilateral cleft patients. The use of presurgical orthopedics (PSO) and gingivoperiosteoplasty (GPP) may promote bone formation at the alveolar cleft, but can also have detrimental effects on maxillary development. Our objective was to investigate the effect of PSO and GPP on maxillary development in bilateral cleft lip and alveolus (BCLA) patients. Subjects and Methods We had 3 complete BCLA patients who had received PSO. All patients underwent cheiloplasty and GPP simultaneously. At 4 years, maxillary protraction head gear was used as part of the protocol. They were evaluated by cephalometric analysis at 4 and 8 years of age, and by CT imaging at 5 years of age. Results At 4 years of age, patients with all BCLA had anterior crossbite of deciduous central incisors. As a result of maxillary protraction, jaw development at 8 years was good. Among all patients, only one showed bone formation at the alveolar cleft sufficient to avoid alveolar bone grafting (ABG). Discussion All patients presented anterior crossbite in the premaxillary region, but had good maxillary growth at 8 years old as a result of maxillary protraction. The combination of PSO and GPP can potentially eliminate the need for ABG and does not significantly retard maxillary development. PSO with GPP and protraction head gear may be an option, but long-term growth is not known.