Reply: The Effectiveness of Mandibular Distraction in Improving Airway Obstruction The Florentine Center Experience
Riley Hospital for Children, Indiana University, Indianapolis, Ind., firstname.lastname@example.org
I am glad to read and learn the details given by our Italian colleagues in their thoughtful letter. I thank Dr. Agostini and his team for their comments on the role and effectiveness of mandibular distraction osteogenesis for the treatment of airway obstruction in syndromic pediatric patients suffering respiratory insufficiency.
Children born with congenital craniofacial abnormalities face a host of complex challenges with regard to airway management.1 Diagnoses such as Pierre Robin sequence and Treacher Collins syndrome can be associated with significant retrognathia and glossoptosis, resulting in airway obstruction. In their letter, Dr. Agostini et al. present their experience with mandibular distraction osteogenesis performed on three patients with Crouzon syndrome, one with Goldenhar syndrome, one with “complex craniofacial malformation,” and two patients with isolated Pierre Robin sequence, and reported an 85.7 percent success rate at relieving respiratory insufficiency (either decannulation or prevention of tracheostomy). I would like to congratulate them on the results they obtained. Their findings further reinforce the important and growing role of mandibular distraction osteogenesis in the treatment of airway obstruction in nonsyndromic and syndromic patients.
Airway and subsequent respiratory compromise is common in patients with craniofacial syndromes. Causes may be various and include structural problems such as mandibular hypoplasia, midface hypoplasia and retrusion, choanal atresia, and tracheal/laryngeal abnormalities, but also central apnea, gastroesophageal reflux, reactive airway disease, and others.1,2 Although it is clear that mandibular distraction osteogenesis is a powerful tool available to the craniofacial surgeon to address upper airway obstruction in the pediatric population, one should keep in mind that it should be considered in selected patients with mandibular hypoplasia and upper airway obstruction who have failed conservative airway management efforts before proceeding to tracheostomy. Proper patient selection and workup to rule out associated lower airway anomalies is key to high success rates.
The author has no financial interest to declare in relation to the content of this communication.
Youssef Tahiri, M.D., C.M., M.Sc.
Riley Hospital for Children
1. Forrest CR, Hopper RA. Craniofacial syndromes and surgery. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2013;131:86e–109e
2. Hardin KA. Syndromic craniosynostosis: Complicated airway obstruction calls for progressive strategies in surgical management. Expert Rev Respir Med. 2010;4:315–319
Letters to the Editor, discussing material recently published in the Journal, are welcome. They will have the best chance of acceptance if they are received within 8 weeks of an article’s publication. Letters to the Editor may be published with a response from the authors of the article being discussed. Discussions beyond the initial letter and response will not be published. Letters submitted pertaining to published Discussions of articles will not be printed. Letters to the Editor are not usually peer reviewed, but the Journal may invite replies from the authors of the original publication. All Letters are published at the discretion of the Editor.
Letters submitted should pose a specific question that clarifies a point that either was not made in the article or was unclear, and therefore a response from the corresponding author of the article is requested.
Authors will be listed in the order in which they appear in the submission. Letters should be submitted electronically via PRS’ enkwell, at www.editorialmanager.com/prs/.
We reserve the right to edit Letters to meet requirements of space and format. Any financial interests relevant to the content of the correspondence must be disclosed. Submission of a Letter constitutes permission for the American Society of Plastic Surgeons and its licensees and asignees to publish it in the Journal and in any other form or medium.
The views, opinions, and conclusions expressed in the Letters to the Editor represent the personal opinions of the individual writers and not those of the publisher, the Editorial Board, or the sponsors of the Journal. Any stated views, opinions, and conclusions do not reflect the policy of any of the sponsoring organizations or of the institutions with which the writer is affiliated, and the publisher, the Editorial Board, and the sponsoring organizations assume no responsibility for the content of such correspondence.
The Journal requests that individuals submit no more than five (5) letters to Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery in a calendar year.©2014American Society of Plastic Surgeons