Bits and pieces in Maxillofacial abnormal bone fusion and malformation
Main Article Content
Abstract
Introduction: The Timing of surgical intervention when considering the crinofacial and cleft defect is somewhat contrevesical as such some practicians would rather delay the procedure to gain growth and prevent soft tissue scaring.
Argument and contra argument: In This note our argument is That earlier intervention is the best predicted and significant approach. on the other hand, the contra argument could not be beneficial anymore especially after the new knowledge of the theory of the cascade growth waves.
Conclusion: Earlier intervention and surgical repair is the Best approach as the growth cascade is significant and important for the patient social and financial outcome.
Article Details
The Medical Research Archives grants authors the right to publish and reproduce the unrevised contribution in whole or in part at any time and in any form for any scholarly non-commercial purpose with the condition that all publications of the contribution include a full citation to the journal as published by the Medical Research Archives.
References
2. https://medlineplus.gov/genetics/gene/fgfr2/, Entry - *176943 - FIBROBLAST GROWTH FACTOR RECEPTOR 2; FGFR2 – OMIM
3. Congenital maxillomandibular fusion: Case series and review of the literature congenital syngnathia treatment approach - Advances in Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Volume 6, April–June 2022, 100251 Othman Altuwairgia,b,c,, Abdulsalam Aljabab d, Ali Makrami e, Ahmed Alomar f,Yasir Alturkistany g, Abu Bakarsharwani e, Bushra Alhazmi h, laila layqah , Ghufran Alayfan j,Waleed Baharoon
4. Fetal myelomeningocele repair: a narrative review of the history, current controversies and future directions -Kaeli J. Yamashiro, Diana L. Farmer/ Vol 10, No 5 (May 27, 2021)
5. Bobis S, Jarocha D, Majka M. Mesenchymal stem cells: characteristics and clinical applications. Folia Histochem Cytobiol. 2006;44:215–230.
6. Bueno DF, Kerkis I, Costa AM, et al. New source of muscle-derived stem cells with potential for alveolar bone reconstruction in cleft lip and/or palate patients. Tissue Eng Part A. 2009;15:427–435. doi:10.1089/ten.tea.2007.0417.
7. Bueno DF, Kerkis I, Costa AM, et al. New source of muscle-derived stem cells with potential for alveolar bone reconstruction in cleft lip and/or palate patients. Tissue 2018;10:66–77. doi:10.4252/wjsc.v10.i6.66.
8. de Mendonça Costa A, Bueno DF, Martins MT, et al. Reconstruction of large cranial defects in nonimmunosuppressed experimental design with human dental pulp stem cells. J Craniofac Surg. 2008;19:204–210. doi:10.1097/scs.0b013e31815c8a54.
9. Moos S, Marcolin F, Tornincasa S, et al. Cleft lip pathology diagnosis and foetal landmark extraction via 3D geometrical analysis. Int J Interact Des Manuf. 2017;11:1– 8. doi:10.1007/s12008-014-0244-1
10. Tanikawa D, Pinheiro CC, Almeida MC, et al. Deciduous dental pulp stem cells for maxillary alveolar reconstruction in cleft lip and palate patients. Stem Cells Int. 2020;2020:1–9. doi:10.1155/2020/6234167.
11. Tanikawa D, Pinheiro CC, Almeida MC, et al. Deciduous dental pulp stem cells for maxillary alveolar reconstruction in cleft lip and palate patients. Stem Cells Int. 2020;2020:1–9. doi:10.1155/2020/6234167.
12. Innovative Molecular and Cellular Therapeutics in Cleft Palate Tissue Engineering, Jeremie D Oliver,Shihai Jia , Leslie R Halpern , Emily M Graham, Emma C Turner , John S Colombo , David W Grainger ,Rena N D'SouzaTissue Eng Part B Rev. 2021 Jun 16;27(3):215–237. doi:10.1089/ten.teb.2020.0181