Unilateral facial edema after filler injection of the lower eyelid.

The use of hyaluronic acid (HA) gel fillers for rejuvenation of the face has been increasing in popularity over the years. This nonsurgical, temporary technique is commonly used in the periocular region to restore volume. The aim of this study was creating awareness in the potential causes of edema after hyaluronic acid gel filler injections under the eyes. A 32-year-old woman presented for a cosmetic consultation to address unilateral swelling of the left check. She states she had an HA filler injected in the tear trough on both sides. Extensive evaluation and ultrasound were performed by physicians of different specialties. Intra-oral and radiological examination revealed a tooth-related cause known as apical periodontitis. Removal of this tooth resulted in complete resolution of the patient's presenting symptoms. Familiarity with all the potential causes of adverse events after injections with hyaluronic acid gel fillers accelerates the treatment and healing of the patient with complications. Reporting this case should raise awareness about possible teeth-related complications.

[Bimaxillary osteotomy for obstructive sleep apnoea]. / Bimaxillaire osteotomie bij obstructieve slaapapneu.

Bimaxillary osteotomy for obstructive sleep apnoea Objective To gain insight into postoperative results of bimaxillary osteotomy in patients with obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA). Design Retrospective patient series. Method All patients with OSA who had undergone a bimaxillary osteotomy in the Amphia Hospital in Breda in the Netherlands in the past 4 years were eligible for inclusion. The primary outcome measures were the apnoea-hypopnoea index (AHI), a decrease in symptoms and the success of the operation. Results In the past 4 years, 22 patients with OSA underwent a bimaxillary osteotomy in the Amphia Hospital in Breda. We further analysed data from 18 patients. All patients had a normal to moderately elevated BMI. 94.1% had a complete absence or a marked decline in symptoms postoperatively. In 23.5% the cure was complete (AHI < 5/h) and treatment was successful in 52.9% of the patients (> 50% reduction in AHI and AHI < 20/h). The average AHI decreased from 38/h preoperatively to 11/h postoperatively. Conclusion Bimaxillary osteotomy is currently often regarded as a final treatment option for patients with OSA. Even in these patients with a relatively complex condition the results of the operation are relatively good. For treatment providers it is important to recognise patients who might benefit from a bimaxillary osteotomy, such as patients with OSA and retrognathia.

Taking the endochondral route to craniomaxillofacial bone regeneration: A logical approach?

The current golden standard for treatment of craniomaxillofacial critical size bone defects, autologous bone grafting, is associated with several disadvantages which have prompted an increased demand for alternatives. New solutions are emerging in the form of bone tissue engineering. This involves harvesting of multipotent mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs), after which they can be differentiated towards the osteogenic lineage mimicking intramembranous bone formation. However, translating this approach from laboratory to clinic has met with limited success. Consequently, attention has shifted towards investigation of the alternative endochondral route of bone regeneration. At a first glance, this approach may not appear logical for maxillofacial bone regeneration as most bones in the face originate from intramembranous mechanisms. Therefore, the goal of this review is to discuss the sense and non-sense of exploring endochondral bone regeneration as a novel reconstructive option for craniomaxillofacial bone defects. The embryological origin of craniomaxillofacial bone structures and their repair mechanisms are introduced. Also, the potential of MSC-like cells, the neural crest-derived stem cells from craniomaxillofacial sources, are discussed with a focus on regeneration of bone defects. Further, the current status of endochondral bone regeneration from MSCs is highlighted. Together, these aspects contribute in answering whether endochondral bone regeneration can be a logical approach to restore craniomaxillofacial bone defects.