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
复制标题
颅骨狭窄手术治疗中的牵引成骨：颅面内、外牵引装置的比较
DOI：
10.1007/s00381-007-0475-6
复制
发表时间：
2007
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
C. Rocco
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
S. Pelo;G. Gasparini;A. Petrillo;G. Tamburrini;C. Rocco
目的比较外颅面牵引装置和内颅面牵引装置在颅面推进术中的实际困难，包括手术技术限制和患者不适。材料和方法本研究对相关文献和颅面牵引推进治疗综合征性颅缝早闭患者的个人经验进行分析。结果对100例接受内颅面牵引装置的患者进行分析。研究发现，患者在身体和心理方面都能充分耐受这种分散注意力的装置。它们对日常生活活动的影响相对较小。然而，这种类型的装置的一个显着缺点是难以控制分心向量。对 38 名接受外部颅面牵引装置植入后的患者进行了分析。人们发现这种类型的仪器具有显着的心理影响，并且对娱乐活动具有重要的限制。然而，外部设备在控制分心向量方面具有重要优势，可以根据患者在围手术期和术后早期临床过程中的需求进行修改。两种类型的装置在成骨和面部前移程度方面没有显着差异。结论内部和外部装置对于牵引颅面前移均有效。然而，在手术方面和患者所经历的实际困难方面确实存在显着差异。
PurposeTo 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 methodsThis study involved analysis of the pertinent literature and personal experience on the treatment of patients affected with syndromic craniosynostoses treated with craniofacial distraction advancement.ResultsOne 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.ConclusionBoth 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.
各种类型颅缝早闭的牵引方法的适应症和手术结果。
DOI：
--
发表时间：
2004
期刊：
Childs Nervous System 20
影响因子：
--
作者：
Nonaka Y;Oi S;Miyawaki T;et al.
通讯作者：
et al.