Comparison of perioperative morbidity after LeFort III and monobloc distraction osteogenesis.
We have compared distraction by monobloc and LeFort III osteotomy in the treatment of midfacial retrusion. We treated 14 patients with midface distraction (Crouzon syndrome (n = 9), Apert disease (n = 3), and other (n = 2)), 7 of whom had monobloc distraction and 7 who had LeFort III osteotomy. We compared duration of operation, peroperative blood loss, and complications. The two groups were comparable with respect to diagnosis, type of distraction (internal or external device), and duration of distraction. The operating time was longer in the monobloc than in the LeFort III group, but not significantly so (p = 0.09). The weight-adjusted blood losses were significantly different (66 ml/kg and 34 ml/kg, respectively (p = 0.05). The two groups had similar numbers of complications (p = 0.3), and similar duration of hospital stay. Both techniques seem safe. The choice of operation, therefore, should be tailored to the individual patient and the monobloc procedure should be used if indicated.
Meling
Torstein R
TR
Department of Neurosurgery, The National Hospital, University of Oslo, Gaustadveien, Oslo, Norway. torsteinrmeling@mailcity.com
Høgevold
Hans-Erik
HE
Due-Tønnessen
Bernt J
BJ
Skjelbred
Per
P
D000293:Adolescent; D000328:Adult; D016063:Blood Loss, Surgical; D002648:Child; D002675:Child, Preschool; D003398:Craniosynostoses / Q000601:surgery*; D005260:Female; D005546:Forehead / Q000002:abnormalities / Q000601:surgery; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008313:Malocclusion, Angle Class III / Q000601:surgery; D008437:Maxilla / Q000002:abnormalities / Q000601:surgery*; D008844:Micrognathism / Q000601:surgery; D019857:Osteogenesis, Distraction / Q000009:adverse effects*; D019340:Osteotomy, Le Fort / Q000009:adverse effects*; D063173:Retrognathia / Q000601:surgery*; D012189:Retrospective Studies; D013530:Surgical Wound Infection / Q000209:etiology; D055815:Young Adult