Document Detail

Complications with facial advancement: a comparison between the Le Fort III and monobloc advancements.
MedLine Citation:
PMID:  8479999     Owner:  NLM     Status:  MEDLINE    
Certain procedures for facial advancement may carry greater risk than others. While many believe that separating the cranial base by monobloc advancement leads to a higher complication rate, no comparative series between the Le Fort III and monobloc advancements has ever been reported. We reviewed our series of these different techniques. Over a 15-year period, 29 patients underwent 30 surgical procedures, with either a midfacial or frontofacial advancement. The average age of patients at the time of surgery was 12 years, with a range from 3 to 26 years. There were 20 Le Fort III and 10 monobloc advancements. Follow-up averaged 4 years, with a range from 10 weeks to 13 years. There were no deaths in this series. The infectious complications differed significantly between the two groups, with all major infections occurring in the monobloc group. The noninfectious complications (2 major and 20 minor) were proportionately distributed between the Le Fort III and monobloc groups. Aesthetic results of the midface, judged by the percentage of revisions necessary, were found to be the same between the two procedures. Aesthetic results were noted to correlate strongly with age at the time of surgery, with the older patients being judged as having a better aesthetic result and most of the younger patients requiring a repeat of the facial advancement. We conclude that while we were unable to determine any definitive aesthetic advantage of one procedure over the other in our series, there was a significantly higher infection rate with the monobloc advancement. On the basis of these results, we recommend a staging of the forehead and midfacial advancements.
J A Fearon; L A Whitaker
Related Documents :
11094369 - Evaluation of the modified maxillary protractor applied to class iii malocclusion with ...
18929269 - Short-term and long-term treatment outcomes with the fr-3 appliance of fränkel.
16770209 - Severe proliferative congenital temporomandibular joint ankylosis: a proposed treatment...
3551579 - Mixed dentition treatment case report.
23486999 - Single and multiple injections of subconjunctival ranibizumab for early, recurrent pter...
6579869 - The dilemma of class iii treatment. early or late?
20708319 - Use of temporalis fascia as an interpositional arthroplasty in temporomandibular joint ...
16989709 - Predictors of weight status following laparoscopic gastric bypass.
19576499 - Endophthalmitis after pars plana vitrectomy a 20- and 25-gauge comparison.
Publication Detail:
Type:  Comparative Study; Journal Article    
Journal Detail:
Title:  Plastic and reconstructive surgery     Volume:  91     ISSN:  0032-1052     ISO Abbreviation:  Plast. Reconstr. Surg.     Publication Date:  1993 May 
Date Detail:
Created Date:  1993-05-26     Completed Date:  1993-05-26     Revised Date:  2014-10-13    
Medline Journal Info:
Nlm Unique ID:  1306050     Medline TA:  Plast Reconstr Surg     Country:  UNITED STATES    
Other Details:
Languages:  eng     Pagination:  990-5     Citation Subset:  AIM; IM    
Export Citation:
APA/MLA Format     Download EndNote     Download BibTex
MeSH Terms
Child, Preschool
Craniofacial Dysostosis / surgery*
Facial Bones / surgery*
Postoperative Complications
Surgery, Plastic / methods*

From MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine

Previous Document:  The monobloc frontofacial advancement: do the pluses outweigh the minuses?
Next Document:  Median facial dysplasia in unilateral and bilateral cleft lip and palate: a subgroup of median cereb...