Outcomes of Bifocal Transport Distraction Osteogenesis for Repairing Complicated Unilateral Alveolar Cleft

Objectives: This study aimed to assess the outcomes of bifocal transport distraction osteogenesis (BTDO) for closure of a wide or previously failed unilateral alveolar cleft. Methods: Patient in this study had a large alveolar cleft that had not healed with bone grafts. Bone-borne distraction was used under general anesthesia. Intraoperative complications as bleeding and trauma to neighboring teeth were documented. Postoperative complications as wound dehiscence, paresthesia, infection, and bleeding were recorded. Complications including changes in bone segment movement, activation force loss, and occlusal interferences were observed during the activation phase. During the consolidation phase, problems including gingival recession, pulpal vitality, and cosmetic concerns were evaluated. Postoperative, periapical, occlusal, and orthopantomograms were used to evaluate bone gain and bone generation in the distracted area. Results: Ten patients (6 males and 4 females) with unilateral alveolar cleft were included, with mean age of 9.5 +/- 2.5 years. Average cleft width was 12.25 +/- 2.54 mm. There was no intraoperative or postoperative bleeding. Only 1 patient had a wound dehiscence (10%). All patients had mild postoperative pain and edema in upper lip. Only 1 patient complained of numbness in infraorbital nerve's innervated region. Radiographs revealed bone formation in cleft area and bone healing in distracted chamber. Conclusions: Bifocal transport distraction osteogenesis improves success rate of an alveolar cleft treatment especially a wide or previously failed one. This technique associated with minimal complications when careful planning and cooperation from a patient are combined. It can be recommended when other modalities for alveolar cleft are failed. Patients also tolerate the device well.

Automated summary

Bifocal transport distraction osteogenesis improves the success rate of alveolar cleft treatment, especially for wide or previously failed cases. This technique is associated with minimal complications when careful planning and patient cooperation are combined, and can be recommended when other modalities for alveolar cleft treatment have failed. Patients also tolerate the device well.