Related Experiment Videos
Skeletal volume enhancement: implants and osteotomies
1Department of Otolaryngology - Head & Neck Surgery, USC Keck School of Medicine, Los Angeles, California 90033, USA. zim@usc.edu
Summary
Facial skeletal augmentation utilizes alloplastic implants, osteotomies, and distraction osteogenesis. Advances in biomaterials, computer modeling, and tissue engineering offer improved methods for craniomaxillofacial restoration.
Area of Science:
- Plastic Surgery
- Biomaterials Science
- Biotechnology
Background:
- Facial plastic surgeons address form and function, often requiring craniomaxillofacial skeletal augmentation.
- Alloplastic biomaterials and surgical techniques are essential for cosmetic and reconstructive procedures.
Purpose of the Study:
- Review available alloplastic biomaterials for facial volume enhancement.
- Discuss zygomatic sandwich osteotomy for malar augmentation.
- Describe applications of distraction osteogenesis in the craniomaxillofacial region.
- Provide an update on tissue engineering and computer modeling in facial reconstruction.
Main Methods:
- Review of current literature on alloplastic biomaterials.
- Discussion of surgical techniques including zygomatic sandwich osteotomy.
- Analysis of distraction osteogenesis applications.
- Overview of advancements in tissue engineering and computer modeling.
Main Results:
- High-porosity expanded polytetrafluoroethylene and porous polyethylene show good biointegration and biocompatibility.
- Hydroxyapatite cement may cause inflammatory reactions and implant exposure.
- Distraction osteogenesis applications are expanding, with a trend towards internal and biodegradable devices.
- Tissue engineering shows potential for autogenous bone generation, and computer modeling aids in custom facial prostheses fabrication.
Conclusions:
- Multiple options exist for skeletal volume enhancement: alloplastic implants, osteotomies, and distraction osteogenesis.
- Surgeons must individualize treatment based on patient needs and technique pros/cons.
- Technological advancements in biomaterials, hardware, modeling, and tissue engineering will enhance craniomaxillofacial restoration.