Comparison Between Internal and External Distractors in Osteogenesis
NCT ID: NCT03540329
Last Updated: 2018-05-30
Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
UNKNOWN
NA
30 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2018-08-01
2020-10-01
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
The idea of distraction osteogenesis was largely abandoned by many until the 1950s. Ilizarov minimized complications by performing a corticotomy with minimal disruption of the surrounding blood supply and using a system of tension ring fixators to control the distraction in multiple planes. Through a series of experimental studies and clinical applications, Ilizarov established the foundation of distraction osteogenesis and its role in orthopedic management.
Applications in craniofacial surgery were first seen in 1973, when Synder et al applied the approach to mandibular lengthening in a canine animal model. Almost another 20 years passed before McCarthy and colleagues published, in 1992, the first report of mandibular lengthening in 4 children with congenital mandibular deficiency, 3 with hemifacial microsomia, and 1 with Nager syndrome. Thereafter, its role rapidly expanded to the midface and nearly all classic approaches to craniofacial reconstruction.
In general, mandibular distraction can be performed in the ramus for ramus lengthening, in the mandibular angle for downward and forward advancement, or in the mandibular body. Ramus or gonial angle distraction are mainly used to treat facial asymmetries as in hemifacial macrosomia.
Severe mandibular retrognathia can be classified as congenital or acquired. Congenital abnormalities that are associated with severe mandibular retrognathia or micrognathia include craniofacial syndromes such as hemifacial microsomia, Pierre-Robin syndrome, Treacher-Collins syndrome, and Nager syndrome. Adult patients with craniofacial syndromes may have undergone previous surgery at an earlier age, but unfavorable postsurgical growth or skeletal relapse may have occurred.
Severe mandibular retrognathia also can develop following maxillofacial trauma and mandibular fractures, which may have occurred in an adult or as a child Condylar fractures occurring at an early age can result in subsequent bony and/or fibrous temporomandibular joint ankylosis and/or deficient mandibular growth, also adult patients with complications from previous mandibular tumor resection and reconstruction can also present with acquired severe mandibular retrognathia that may require distraction osteogenesis as well.
Despite the advantages of extra-oral distraction devices in the hands of clinicians (application for very small children, simplicity of attachment, ease of manipulation, bidirectional and multidirectional dis- traction), patients are apprehensive about wearing bulky external appliances because of the social inconvenience and the potential of permanent facial scars, these disadvantages and limitations were the primary force driving the evolution of mandibular lengthening and widening toward the development of intra-oral devices.
However nowadays both internal and external distractors are used in a variety of indications in these cases each of the two types of distractor devices has its own advantages and disadvantages.
Aim of the work:
The aim of this study is to compare external and internal distraction devices for mandibular lengthening in terms of bone lengthening, patient comfort, and complications.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Cleft Orthognathic Surgery Versus Distraction Osteogenesis - Which is Better?
NCT00930124
Osteogenic Potential of Cissus Quadrangularis Alveolar Ridge Distraction
NCT04669795
Measuring the Influence of Maxillary Obturator Prosthesis on Facial Morphology in Patient With Unilateral Maxillary Defects Using Stereophotogrammetry
NCT05310149
Patient Specific Implant Versus Miniplates for Advancement of Hypoplastic Maxilla
NCT06292234
The Use of Self Inflating Tissue Expanders In The Treatment Of Alveolar Cleft
NCT03010345
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Preoperative assessment:
* Informed consent will be obtained from all patients before their inclusion in the study.
* Photographs will be taken for the patient in lateral, antro-posterior and oblique positions preoperative.
* Lateral cephalometric radiographs or computed tomography (CT) or cone beam CT scans will be done for each patient pre-operatively.
* The decision to perform internal or external device will be based on preoperative and intraoperative considerations, such as anatomical bony characteristics affecting the possibility to place internal devices and patient cooperation.
Principles of the operation:
* anaesthesia: general anesthesia.
* Intraoperative consideration of internal versus external distractor is decided depending on the availability of bone stock.
* Osteotomy will be done according to each case individually making sure that it suits the vector of distraction required for each case.
* The approach for the external devices will be intraoral between the mental nerve anteriorly and gonial area posteriorly on both sides of the mandible.
* The approach for internal devices will be intraoral. While preserving the mandibular branch of the facial nerve.
* After 3-5 days of latency period for callus organization, gradual lengthening of the mandible will be performed at a rate of 0.5 mm twice a day for a total of 1 mm per day until achieving desired length.
Postoperative management and assessment:
* The patient will take broad spectrum and anaerobic antibiotics, anti-edematous, analgesic in addition to supportive treatment.
* After 3-5 days of latency period for callus organization according to patient age and condition, gradual lengthening of the mandible was performed at a rate of 0.5 mm twice a day for a total of 1 mm per day until achieving desired length.
* Following distraction phase there will be consolidation phase that will not be less than 8 weeks.
* Removing of internal or external distractor device and start retention phase if required with assistance of orthodontic appliances to avoid relapse.
* The patients will be evaluated with lateral cephalograms and head CT to assess the changes and amount of new bone formation following distraction.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
NON_RANDOMIZED
PARALLEL
TREATMENT
NONE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
I-A Internal distraction
Internal osteogenesis distractor in congenital mandibular deformities in patients in growing age.
Internal Osteogenesis distractor
Internal distraction osteogenesis in mandible
I-A External distraction
External osteogenesis distractor in congenital mandibular deformities in patients in growing age.
External Osteogenesis distractor
External distraction osteogenesis in mandible
I-B Internal distraction
Internal osteogenesis distractor in congenital mandibular deformities in adult patients.
Internal Osteogenesis distractor
Internal distraction osteogenesis in mandible
I-B External distraction
External osteogenesis distractor in congenital mandibular deformities in adult patients.
External Osteogenesis distractor
External distraction osteogenesis in mandible
II-A Internal distraction
Internal osteogenesis distractor in acquired mandibular deformities in patients in growing age
Internal Osteogenesis distractor
Internal distraction osteogenesis in mandible
II-A External distraction
External osteogenesis distractor in acquired mandibular deformities in patients in growing age
External Osteogenesis distractor
External distraction osteogenesis in mandible
II-B Internal distraction
Internal osteogenesis distractor in acquired mandibular deformities in Adult patients.
Internal Osteogenesis distractor
Internal distraction osteogenesis in mandible
II-B External distraction
External osteogenesis distractor in acquired mandibular deformities in Adult patients.
External Osteogenesis distractor
External distraction osteogenesis in mandible
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Internal Osteogenesis distractor
Internal distraction osteogenesis in mandible
External Osteogenesis distractor
External distraction osteogenesis in mandible
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
2. Males and females between one month and 50 years.
3. Patients with acquired mandibular deformities as post traumatic (temporomandibular ankyloses), asymmetries, post-surgical as after mandibular tumor resection and irradiation.
Exclusion Criteria
1 Month
50 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Assiut University
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Ehab Ragab
Assistant Lecturer
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Assem Kamel, MD
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
Assiut University
Osama Taha, MD
Role: STUDY_CHAIR
Assiut University
Awny Askalany, MD
Role: STUDY_CHAIR
Assiut University
Ehab Ragab, M.Sc
Role: STUDY_DIRECTOR
Assiut University
Central Contacts
Reach out to these primary contacts for questions about participation or study logistics.
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
Rachmiel A, Levy M, Laufer D. Lengthening of the mandible by distraction osteogenesis: report of cases. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1995 Jul;53(7):838-46. doi: 10.1016/0278-2391(95)90346-1. No abstract available.
Kaban LB, Padwa BL, Mulliken JB. Surgical correction of mandibular hypoplasia in hemifacial microsomia: the case for treatment in early childhood. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1998 May;56(5):628-38. doi: 10.1016/s0278-2391(98)90465-7. No abstract available.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
Distraction osteogenesis
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.