Graft Harvesting for Revascularization in the Head and Neck

The techniques for revascularization in the neurocranium, skull base, and neck continue to evolve at an exciting pace. In this body of literature, however, techniques for harvesting radial artery and saphenous vein grafts are mainly reported using traditional open techniques. Minimally invasive procedures are fast becoming an alternative to open techniques in many fields and have the potential to become the standard of care. The cardiovascular literature is replete with reports of endoscopically harvested vascular grafts. This article reviews both methods, since the current state of the art involves knowledge of open and endoscopic harvesting techniques.     

A new Le Fort I internal distraction device in the treatment of severe maxillary hypoplasia.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this pilot study was to test a new Le Fort I internal distraction device. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A new internal Le Fort I distraction device designed by 1 of the authors was used in 3 patients with cleft lip and palate and severe maxillary hypoplasia who needed maxillary advancements in excess of 12 mm. Presurgical planning used CASSOS (SoftEnable Technology, Ltd, Hong Kong SAR, China) prediction tracing software and a stereolithographic model to calculate the distraction vector. The distractors were pre-bent and installed on the stereolithographic model and activated to advance the maxilla. Surgery was performed in a conventional manner, and distraction was started after a 7-day latency phase at the rate of 1 mm/day and continued until the presurgical plan was achieved. The distractor was removed after a 3-month consolidation phase. Cephalometric radiographs were taken at the completion of each phase. RESULTS: This new Le Fort I internal distraction device successfully distracted the maxillae as planned in all 3 patients. At the end of the distraction phase, the maxillary advancement was measured at 15.8 mm, 15.8 mm, and 13.5 mm, respectively. In each patient, a clockwise rotation of the maxilla was observed with a tendency to a posterior open bite. Postoperative radiographs also showed that the actual distraction vectors differed from the planned vectors. After the consolidation phase, radiographs showed a relapse of 2.6 mm, 0 mm, and 5.0 mm, respectively. There was no further relapse on 3-month follow-up radiographs. Each case showed radiographic evidence of excellent new bone formation at the osteotomy sites. CONCLUSION: The new Le Fort I internal distraction device produced the necessary advancement in all 3 patients. The study also showed that the actual distraction vector differed from the planned vector. This discrepancy was caused by a clockwise rotation of the maxilla during the distraction. Finally, the study showed a variable relapse rate not previously reported in maxillary distraction.