References

International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement. Craniofacial microsomia data collection reference guide 2017. Version 1.0.4. https://ichom.org/files/medical-conditions/craniofacial-microsomia/craniofacial-microsomia-reference-guide.pdf (accessed August 2022)
Heggie AA, Kumar R, Shand JM. The role of distraction osteogenesis in the management of craniofacial syndromes. Ann Maxillofac Surg. 2013; 3:4-10 https://doi.org/10.4103/2231-0746.110063
Ilizarov GA, Lediaev VI, Shitin VP. Techenie reparativnoĭ regeneratsii kompaktnoĭ kosti pri distraktsionnom osteosinteze v razlichnykh usloviiakh fiksatsii kostnykh otlomkov (éksperimental’noe issledovanie) [The course of compact bone reparative regeneration in distraction osteosynthesis under different conditions of bone fragment fixation (experimental study)]. Eksp Khir Anesteziol. 1969; 14:3-12
Miloro M. Mandibular distraction osteogenesis for pediatric airway management. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2010; 68:1512-1523 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2009.09.099
Rahbar R, Robson CD, Mulliken JB Craniofacial, temporal bone, and audiologic abnormalities in the spectrum of hemifacial microsomia. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2001; 127:265-271 https://doi.org/10.1001/archotol.127.3.265
Cline JM, Hicks KE, Patel KG. Characterization of facial paresis in hemifacial microsomia. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2014; 150:188-193 https://doi.org/10.1177/0194599813512775
Birgfeld CB, Heike CL, Saltzman BS Reliable classification of facial phenotypic variation in craniofacial microsomia: a comparison of physical exam and photographs. Head Face Med. 2016; 12 https://doi.org/10.1186/s13005-016-0109-x
Toyserkani NM, Sørensen JA. Medial sural artery perforator flap: a challenging free flap. Eur J Plast Surg. 2015; 38:391-396 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00238-015-1110-5
Lew D. The use of autogenous fat grafts in the correction of facial asymmetries. Atlas Oral Maxillofac Surg Clin North Am. 1996; 4:67-81
Tanna N, Wan DC, Kawamoto HK, Bradley JP. Craniofacial microsomia soft-tissue reconstruction comparison: inframammary extended circumflex scapular flap versus serial fat grafting. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2011; 127:802-811 https://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0b013e3181fed6e4
Kaban LB, Padwa BL, Mulliken JB. Surgical correction of mandibular hypoplasia in hemifacial microsomia: the case for treatment in early childhood. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1998; 56:628-638 https://doi.org/10.1016/s0278-2391(98)90465-7
Harvold E, Vargervik K, Chirici G. Treatment of Hemifacial Microsomia.New York: Alan R. Liss; 1983
Kaban LB, Moses MH, Mulliken JB. Correction of hemifacial microsomia in the growing child: a follow-up study. Cleft Palate J. 1986; 23:50-52
Fariña R, Valladares S, Torrealba R Orthognathic surgery in craniofacial microsomia: treatment algorithm. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2015; 3 https://doi.org/10.1097/GOX.0000000000000259
Sándor GK, McGuire TP, Ylikontiola LP, Serlo WS, Pirttiniemi PM Management of facial asymmetry. Oral Maxillofac Surg Clin North Am. 2007; 19:395-422 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coms.2007.05.001
Mommaerts MY, Nagy K. Is early osteodistraction a solution for the ascending ramus compartment in hemifacial microsomia? A literature study. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2002; 30:201-207 https://doi.org/10.1054/jcms.2002.0314
Mommaerts M. Hemifacial microsomia: management of the vertical ramus compartment. Plast Aesthet Res. 2015; 2:99-106
Pluijmers BI, Caron CJ, Dunaway DJ Mandibular reconstruction in the growing patient with unilateral craniofacial microsomia: a systematic review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2014; 43:286-295 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijom.2013.11.001
Padwa BL, Mulliken JB, Maghen A, Kaban LB. Midfacial growth after costochondral graft construction of the mandibular ramus in hemifacial microsomia. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1998; 56:122-128 https://doi.org/10.1016/s0278-2391(98)90847-3
Zhang RS, Lin LO, Hoppe IC Early mandibular distraction in craniofacial microsomia and need for orthognathic correction at skeletal maturity: a comparative long-term follow-up study. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2018; 142:1285-1293 https://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0000000000004842
Nagy K, Kuijpers-Jagtman AM, Mommaerts MY. No evidence for long-term effectiveness of early osteodistraction in hemifacial microsomia. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2009; 124:2061-2071 https://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0b013e3181bcf2a4
Wolford LM, Bourland TC, Rodrigues D Successful reconstruction of nongrowing hemifacial microsomia patients with unilateral temporomandibular joint total joint prosthesis and orthognathic surgery. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2012; 70:2835-2853 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2012.02.010
Vale F, Scherzberg J, Cavaleiro J 3D virtual planning in orthognathic surgery and CAD/CAM surgical splints generation in one patient with craniofacial microsomia: a case report. Dental Press J Orthod. 2016; 21:89-100 https://doi.org/10.1590/2177-6709.21.1.089-100.oar
van de Lande LS, Pluijmers BI, Caron CJJM Surgical correction of the midface in craniofacial microsomia. Part 1: a systematic review. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2018; 46:1427-1435 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcms.2018.05.043

Craniofacial microsomia: management and outcomes. Part 2

From Volume 15, Issue 4, October 2022 | Pages 183-192

Authors

Clara Gibson

BDentSc, MJDF RCS(Eng), MClin Dent, MOrth RCS(Eng)

Orthodontic Registrar, Department of Orthodontics, Eastman Dental Hospital, 256 Gray's Inn Road, London WC1X 8LD, UK

Articles by Clara Gibson

Suhaym Mubeen

BDS, MFDS RCS(Ed), MOrth RCS(Ed)

Specialist Registrar in Orthodontics, Royal Surrey County Hospital, Egerton Road, Guildford, Surrey, GU2 7XX, UK

Articles by Suhaym Mubeen

Robert Evans

MScD, FDS RCS(Eng), MOrth RCS(Ed)

Consultant Orthodontist, Great Ormond Street Hospital, London

Articles by Robert Evans

Abstract

Craniofacial microsomia (CFM) is a congenital facial condition that affects the structures derived from the first and second pharyngeal arches. It results in underdevelopment of facial structures, most commonly causing abnormal mandibular growth and morphology. Part 1 of this two-part series outlined the aetiology, classification systems and clinical features of CFM. In this article, we explore the management pathway and treatment approaches that may be undertaken. We highlight the dental and orthodontic involvement in managing patients with CFM.

CPD/Clinical Relevance: For patients with CFM, having an understanding of the overall facial and dental management helps the clinician to plan for dental and orthodontic care.

Article

CFM is a complex three-dimensional deformity that requires an ongoing multidisciplinary approach in its management. Owing to the heterogeneity of the phenotype of facial asymmetry and varying levels of soft tissue deficiency, each patient's management pathway is highly individualized in relation to the extent of involvement of each organ.

Management and the timing of interventions are based on the severity of the case, limitation to function, patient and aesthetic concerns and psychosocial concerns. Functional issues may include problems with the airway, vision, hearing, and speech, feeding, swallowing and growth, oral health, mastication and occlusion and psychosocial, as indicated by the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement tool.1

The multidisciplinary requirement of care necessitates that patients are managed in secondary or tertiary care centres. Comprehensive management requires the involvement of plastic surgery, ear nose and throat surgeons, clinical psychologists, audiologists, speech and language therapists, ophthalmologists, craniofacial surgeons, oral and maxillofacial surgeons, orthodontics, paediatric dentists, and restorative dentists (Table 1).

Register now to continue reading

Thank you for visiting Orthodontic Update and reading some of our resources. To read more, please register today. You’ll enjoy the following great benefits:

What's included

  • Up to 2 free articles per month
  • New content available