Clinical Trials Logo

Micrognathism clinical trials

View clinical trials related to Micrognathism.

Filter by:
  • Not yet recruiting  
  • Page 1

NCT ID: NCT06250907 Not yet recruiting - Clinical trials for Mandibular Deficiency

Accuracy of Implant Placement for Patients With Mandibular Reconstruction Using Dynamic Navigation and Static Guides

Start date: February 29, 2024
Phase: N/A
Study type: Interventional

To evaluate and compare the accuracy of implant placement using dynamic navigation technique versus static template technique in patients with bone tissue flap reconstruction of mandibular defects, thus further guiding the clinical application of dynamic navigation systems to assist in conventional implant placement in patients with mandibular defects.

NCT ID: NCT04041388 Not yet recruiting - Clinical trials for Maxillary Hypoplasia

Maxillary Segment Tipping During Transpalatal Distraction

Start date: September 1, 2019
Phase: N/A
Study type: Interventional

The investigator proposes a multi-centre study to investigate tipping of teeth, bringing into consideration the height of the osteotomy line and the height and placement of the transpalatal distractor as possible factors. If tipping occurs depending on these factors, the investigator could identify the situations that cannot be straightened by the orthodontist and provide another course of action for these specific patients.

NCT ID: NCT03540329 Not yet recruiting - Facial Asymmetry Clinical Trials

Comparison Between Internal and External Distractors in Osteogenesis

Start date: August 1, 2018
Phase: N/A
Study type: Interventional

Distraction osteogenesis is a powerful technique for creating new bone during significant lengthening of the mandible without the need for bone grafting and associated donor site morbidity. The idea of distraction osteogenesis was largely abandoned by many until the 1950s. Ilizarov minimized complications by performing a corticotomy with minimal disruption of the surrounding blood supply and using a system of tension ring fixators to control the distraction in multiple planes. Through a series of experimental studies and clinical applications, Ilizarov established the foundation of distraction osteogenesis and its role in orthopedic management. Applications in craniofacial surgery were first seen in 1973, when Synder et al applied the approach to mandibular lengthening in a canine animal model. Almost another 20 years passed before McCarthy and colleagues published, in 1992, the first report of mandibular lengthening in 4 children with congenital mandibular deficiency, 3 with hemifacial microsomia, and 1 with Nager syndrome. Thereafter, its role rapidly expanded to the midface and nearly all classic approaches to craniofacial reconstruction. In general, mandibular distraction can be performed in the ramus for ramus lengthening, in the mandibular angle for downward and forward advancement, or in the mandibular body. Ramus or gonial angle distraction are mainly used to treat facial asymmetries as in hemifacial macrosomia. Severe mandibular retrognathia can be classified as congenital or acquired. Congenital abnormalities that are associated with severe mandibular retrognathia or micrognathia include craniofacial syndromes such as hemifacial microsomia, Pierre-Robin syndrome, Treacher-Collins syndrome, and Nager syndrome. Adult patients with craniofacial syndromes may have undergone previous surgery at an earlier age, but unfavorable postsurgical growth or skeletal relapse may have occurred. Severe mandibular retrognathia also can develop following maxillofacial trauma and mandibular fractures, which may have occurred in an adult or as a child Condylar fractures occurring at an early age can result in subsequent bony and/or fibrous temporomandibular joint ankylosis and/or deficient mandibular growth, also adult patients with complications from previous mandibular tumor resection and reconstruction can also present with acquired severe mandibular retrognathia that may require distraction osteogenesis as well. Despite the advantages of extra-oral distraction devices in the hands of clinicians (application for very small children, simplicity of attachment, ease of manipulation, bidirectional and multidirectional dis- traction), patients are apprehensive about wearing bulky external appliances because of the social inconvenience and the potential of permanent facial scars, these disadvantages and limitations were the primary force driving the evolution of mandibular lengthening and widening toward the development of intra-oral devices. However nowadays both internal and external distractors are used in a variety of indications in these cases each of the two types of distractor devices has its own advantages and disadvantages. Aim of the work: The aim of this study is to compare external and internal distraction devices for mandibular lengthening in terms of bone lengthening, patient comfort, and complications.