Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Biomechanical behavior of an alveolar graft under maxillary therapies

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Biomechanics and Modeling in Mechanobiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Cleft lip and palate is a congenital defect that affects the oral cavity. Depending on its severity, alveolar graft surgery and maxillary orthopedic therapies must be carried out as a part of the treatment. It is widely accepted that the therapies should be performed before grafting. Nevertheless, some authors have suggested that mechanical stimuli such as those from the maxillary therapies could improve the success rate of the graft. The aim of this study is to computationally determine the effect of maxillary therapies loads on the biomechanical response of an alveolar graft with different degrees of ossification. We also explore how the transverse width of the cleft affects the graft behavior and compare results with a non-cleft skull. Results suggest that stresses increase within the graft as it ossifies and are greater if maxillary expansion therapy is applied. This has consequences in the bone remodeling processes that are necessary for the graft osseointegration. Maxillary orthopedic therapies after graft surgery could be considered as a part of the treatment since they seem to act as a positive extra stimulus that can benefit the graft.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16
Fig. 17
Fig. 18

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Arias Urueña (2015) Clinical aspects associated with syndromic forms of Orofacial Clefts in a Colombian population. Colomb Méd 46:162–167

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baumgart (2000) Stiffness—an unknown world of mechanical science? Injury-Int J Care Injured 31:14–23

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bellomo (2012) A constitutive model for tissue adaptation: necrosis and stress driven growth. Mech Res Commun 42:51–59

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bidez (2015) Clinical biomechanics in implant dentistry. Mosby, London, pp 95–106

    Google Scholar 

  • Borba (2014) Predictors of complication for alveolar cleft bone graft. Br J Oral Maxillof Surg 52(2):174–178

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bosiakov (2017) Craniofacial stress patterns and displacements after activation of hyrax device. Facta Universitatis Series: finite element modelling. Mech Eng 15:517–533

    Google Scholar 

  • Cavassan de Oliveira (2004) Rapid maxillary expansion after secondary alveolar bone graft in a patient with bilateral cleft lip and palate. Cleft Palate-craniofac J 41:332–339

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cerón Zapata (2010) A retrospective characterization study on patients with oral clefts in Medellín. Colombia, South America. Rev Fac Odontol Univ Antioq 22:81–87

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen (2013) Biomechanical effects on maxillary protraction of the craniofacial skeleton with cleft lip and palate after alveolar bone graft. J Craniofac Surg 24:446–453

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen (2015) Asymmetric maxillary protraction for unilateral cleft lip and palate patients using finite element analysis. J Craniofac Surg 26(2):388–392

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Conway (2015) Ten-year experience of more than 35,000 orofacial clefts in Africa. BMC Pediatrics 15:8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • da Silva Filho (2009) Rapid maxillary expansion after secondary alveolar bone grafting in patients with alveolar cleft. Cleft Palate-Craniofac J 46:331–338

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dahl (1979) Transverse maxillary growth in combined cleft lip and palate: a longitudinal roent encephalometric study by the implant method. Cleft Palate J 16:34–41

    Google Scholar 

  • Dissaux (2016) Evaluation of success of alveolar cleft bone graft performed at 5 years versus 10 years of age. J Cranio-Maxillofac Surg 44:21–26

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eom (2018) Displacement and stress distribution of the maxillofacial complex during maxillary protraction using palatal plates: a three-dimensional finite element analysis. Korean J Orthodont 48:304–315

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • García (2008) Regulación del proceso de remodelado óseo. Revista espanola de enfermedades metabolicas oseas 17:10–14

  • Garib (2018) Bone-anchored maxillary protraction in a patient with complete cleft lip and palate: a case report. Am J Orthodont Dentofac Orthop 153:290–297

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guerrero-Vargas A (2019) Influence of interdigitation and expander type in the mechanical response of the midpalatal suture during maxillary expansion. Comput Methods Programs Biomed 176:195–209

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hernández-Gil (2006) Physiological bases of bone regeneration II. The remodeling process. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal 11:E151-215

    Google Scholar 

  • Higuera (2012) The physics of tissue formation with mesenchymal stem cells. Trends Biotechnol 30:583–590

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hopper (2007) Grabb and Smith’s plastic surgery, chapter 23: cleft lip and palate. Lippincott Williams and Wilkins, Philadelphia

  • Horswell (2003) Secondary osteoplasty of the alveolar cleft defect. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 61:1082–1090

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Isaacson (1964) Some effects of rapid maxillary expansion in cleft lip and palate patients. Angle Orthodontist 34:143–154

    Google Scholar 

  • Jia (2006) Long-term outcome of secondary alveolar bone grafting in patients with various types of cleft. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 44:308–312

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kawalec (2015) Risk factors involved in orofacial cleft predisposition—review. Open Med 10:163–175

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Komori (2014) A review of the differing roles of dead and live osteocytes. J Oral Biosci 56:101–104

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kurniawan (2012) Finite element analysis of bone-implant biomechanics: refinement through featuring various osseointegration conditions. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 41:1090–1096

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lam (2012) Impact of cleft width in clefts of secondary palate on the risk of velopharyngeal insufficiency. Arch Fac Plastic Surg 14:360–364

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mandalunis (2006) Remodelación ósea. Actualizaciones en Osteología 2:16–18

  • Pan (2007) Biomechanical effects of rapid palatal expansion on the craniofacial skeleton with cleft palate: a three-dimensional finite element analysis. Cleft Palate-craniofac J 44:149–154

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ralston (2017) Bone structure and metabolism. Medicine 45:560–564

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ramaswamy (2015) Bone response to mechanical loads. Mosby, London, pp 107–125

    Google Scholar 

  • Rychlik (2012) Bone graft healing in alveolar osteoplasty in patients with unilateral lip, alveolar process, and palate clefts. J Craniofac Surg 23:118–123

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rychlik (2012) Osteoplasty of the alveolar cleft defect. Adv Clin Exp Med 21:255–62

    Google Scholar 

  • Simonsen (1986) Secondary bone-grafting for repair of residual cleft defects in the alveolar process and hard palate: a new surgical technique. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 15:1–7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sivarajasingam (2001) Secondary bone grafting of alveolar clefts: a densitometric comparison of iliac crest and tibial bone grafts. Cleft Palate-craniof J 38:11–14

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sun (2018) Biological effects of orthodontic tooth movement into the grafted alveolar cleft. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 76:605–615

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thuaksuban (2006) Iliac crest bone grafting of the alveolar cleft: clinical and quantitative radiographic assessment. Asian J Oral Maxillofac Surg 18(2):105–112

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tokugawa (2012) Bone regeneration of canine artificial alveolar clefts using bone-marrow-derived mesenchymal stromal cells and \(\beta\)-tricalcium phosphate: a preliminary study. Orthodontic Waves 71:51–58

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trivedi (2014) Finite element analysis: a boon to dentistry. J Oral Biol Craniofac Res 4:200–203

  • Trojan Carvalho (2017) Stresses and strains analysis using different palatal expander appliances in upper jaw and midpalatal suture. Artific Organs 41:E41–E51

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trojan-Serpe (2013) Strain level at midpalatal suture-correlation with mechanobiological concepts. In: 22nd Int Congr Mech Eng 8523–8531

  • University of Iowa Roy J, Lucille A (2018) Carver College of Medicine, University of Iowa Health Care: Iowa Head ad Neck Protocols, from https://medicine.uiowa.edu/iowaprotocols/cleft-palate-general-considerations

  • Uzel (2019) The effects of maxillary expansion on late alveolar bone grafting in patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 77(3):607–614

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van der Meij (2003) Outcome of bone grafting in relation to cleft width in unilateral cleft lip and palate patients. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endodontol 96:19–25

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Veros (2016) The genetic basis of cleft lip and cleft palate. Aristotle Univ Med J 43:25–36

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang (2009) Biomechanical analysis of rapid maxillary expansion in the UCLP patient. Med Eng Phys 31:409–417

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weissler (2016) Alveolar bone grafting and cleft lip and palate: a review. Plastic Reconstr Surg 138:1287–1295

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yamamoto (2006) Hydrostatic pressure induces cytokine production in human periodontal ligament cells. Oral Sci Int 3:64–71

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yang (2012) Impact of rapid maxillary expansion in unilateral cleft lip and palate patients after secondary alveolar bone grafting: review and case report. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol 114:e25–e30

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yang (2012) Effects of cleft type, facemask anchorage method, and alveolar bone graft on maxillary protraction: a three-dimensional finite element analysis. Cleft Palate-Craniofac J 49:221–229

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yatabe (2017) Bone-anchored maxillary protraction therapy in patients with unilateral complete cleft lip and palate: 3-dimensional assessment of maxillary effects. Am J Orthodont Dentofac Orthop 152:327–335

  • Zhang (2018) Dentoskeletal effects of facemask therapy in skeletal Class III cleft patients with or without bone graft. Am J Orthodont Dentofac Orthop 153:542-549

  • Zhao A (2008) The structural implications of a unilateral facial skeletal cleft: a three-dimensional finite element model approach. Cleft Palate-Craniofac J 45:121–130

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhao (2015) Hydrostatic pressure promotes the proliferation and osteogenic/chondrogenic differentiation of mesenchymal stem cells: the roles of RhoA and Rac1. Stem Cell Res 14:283–296

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the ELAP—Emerging Leaders of the Americas Program—scholarship and the Universidad Nacional de Colombia for the funding support that allowed the realization of this research.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Mechanical and Mechatronic Engineering Department, Faculty of Engineering, Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Carrera 30 No 45A-03, Bogotá, DC, Colombia

    S. M. Velez-Muriel & D. A. Garzon-Alvarado

  2. Structural Engineering Department, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Brazil

    E. Talma & E. B. Las Casas

  3. Mechanical Engineering Department, School of Dentistry, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada

    D. L. Romanyk

  4. Department of Mechanical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Universidad ECCI, Bogotá, Colombia

    J. A. Guerrero-Vargas

Authors
  1. S. M. Velez-Muriel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. E. Talma
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. D. L. Romanyk
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. E. B. Las Casas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. J. A. Guerrero-Vargas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. D. A. Garzon-Alvarado
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to S. M. Velez-Muriel.

Additional information

Publisher's note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Velez-Muriel, S.M., Talma, E., Romanyk, D.L. et al. Biomechanical behavior of an alveolar graft under maxillary therapies. Biomech Model Mechanobiol 20, 1519–1532 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10237-021-01460-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10237-021-01460-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation