Craniomaxillofacial (CMF) Distraction System

A modular system for cranial and mandibular distraction provides intraoperative flexibility to accommodate surgeon and patient needs.

One system. Four indications. 1000+ configurations.

Features & Benefits

Distraction bodies with an anti-reversal mechanism

The distractor bodies are designed with a smooth surface to prevent pinching or catching on soft tissue during implantation, activation, or removal.^a

Anti-reversal mechanism does not require intraoperative locking to prevent backward rotation of the distractor.^a

Distractor bodies can be activated in both directions by the surgeon by use of the Surgeon Activation Instrument.^a

cmf distraction system footplate options

Many footplate options

Footplates, screws, and screwdriver blades are colour coded to simplify the surgical workflow and may improve efficiency and decrease OR time.^a,b

Removable extension arms

Extension arms provide access to point of distractor activation from various distances.^c Designed to limit soft tissue interference

Rigid and flexible extension arms can be removed after the activation period.^d
Flexible extension arms with in-line removal to easily disengage in presence of soft tissue coverage.^a

Raised head screws

Raised head screws and screwdriver blades are designed to aid in screw removal from difficult to reach anatomical regions.^b

Raised head screws and PlusDrive^® screws can be used interchangeably.

Patient activation instrument

Patient Activation Instrument designed to prevent unintended device reversal.^b,c,e

The distractor can be readily activated in the correct direction by use of the Patient Activation Instrument.^a

CMF Distractor Assembly 145255-200701

04:40

CMFD Activation Guide 146197-200710

02:21

TRUMATCH^® CMF Personalized Solutions for preoperative planning

Our total solution seamlessly integrates virtual surgical planning and intraoperative patient-specific tools to help achieve your goals of:

Accuracy through visualization of anatomy and identification of surgical challenges within a 3D planning environment, intraoperative patient-specific tools to accurately transfer the plan to the OR, and personalized implants.^2,5,7
Efficiency through virtual surgical planning assisted by experienced clinical engineers to optimize preparation, surgical time, and the number of procedural steps.^1,3,5,10
Patient benefit by striving to achieve satisfying aesthetic results and minimizing operative time.^4,6,8,9,11

Services and products available for the distraction (see below)*:

Planning session

Live interactive planning session with a knowledgeable team of clinical engineers

Surgical guides

Surgical guides function as cutting and drilling guides to transfer the plan to the operating room

Anatomic models

Anatomic models for bending distractor footplates preoperatively

Supporting Documentation

Resources

CMFD Brochure

View Brochure

CMFD Patient Care Guide

View Publication

CMFD Info Sheet

View Publication

Request Sales Rep

If you wish to learn more about this product, submit a request and a representative of DePuy Synthes will be in touch shortly.

Request Brochure

If you require a printed or digital brochure or surgical technique for this product, submit your request and we will send it to you.

Other Requests

Have a different kind of query? Simply fill out the details of your request and we will get back to you as soon as possible.

References

* powered by Materialise

a. DePuy Synthes, CMFD Relaunch Lab 1 Report, A.120, Oct 2019, WC#0000248942. Data on file.
b. DePuy Synthes, Lab 2 Surgeon Validation Lab Report, A.51, Nov 2019, WC#0000261698. Data on file.
c. DePuy Synthes, CMFD Relaunch Lab 3 Report, A.58, Nov 2019, WC#0000268053. Data on file.
d. DePuy Synthes, Cadaver Lab Rigid Extension Arm Validation Report, A.22, Nov 2017, WC#0000268339. Data on file.
e. DePuy Synthes, CMFD Relaunch Lab 3 Report, A.18, Oct 2019, WC#0000287979. Data on file.

Xia JJ, Phillips CV, Gateno J, Teichgraeber JF, Christensen AM, Gliddon MJ, Lemoine JJ, Liebschner MAK. Cost-Effectiveness Analysis for Computer-Aided Surgical Simulation in Complex Cranio-Maxillofacial Surgery. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2006(64): 1780–1784.
Hsu SS-P, Gateno J, Bell RB, Hirsch DL, Markiewicz MR, Teichfraeber JF, Zhou X, Xia JJ. Accuracy of a Computer-Aided Surgical Simulation Protocol for Orthognathic Surgery: A Prospective Multicenter Study. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2013; 71(1): 128–142.
Saad A, Winters R, Wise MW, Dupin CL, Hilaire HS. Virtual Surgical Planning in Complex Composite Maxillofacial Reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2013; 132(3): 626–633.
Xia JJ, Shevchenko L, Gateno J, Teichgraeber JF, Taylor TD, Lasky RE, English JD, Kau CH, McGrory KR. Outcome Study of Computer-Aided Surgical Simulation in the Treatment of Patients with Craniomaxillofacial Deformities. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2011(69): 2014–2024.
Rodby KA, Turin S, Jacobs RJ, Cruz JF, Hassid VJ, Kolokythas A, Antony AK. Advances in oncologic head and neck reconstruction: Systematic review and future considerations of virtual surgical planning and computer aided design/computer aided modeling. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2014 Sep; 67(9): 1171–1185.
Modabber A, Gerressen M, Stiller MB, Noroozi N, Fuglein A, Holzle F, Riediger D, Ghassemi A. Computer assisted mandibular reconstruction with vascularized iliac crest bone graft. Aesth Plast Surg 2012 Jun;36(3):653-659.
Roser SM, Ramachandra S, Blair H, Grist W, Carlson GW, Christensen AM, Weimer KA, Steed MB. The accuracy of virtual surgical planning in free fibula mandibular reconstruction: comparison of planned and final results. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2010 Nov; 68(11):2824-32.
Leiggener C, Messo E, Thor A, Zeilhofer H.-F, Hirsch J.-M: A selective laser sintering guide for transferring a virtual plan to real time surgery in composite mandibular reconstruction with free fibula osseous flaps. Int. J. Oral Maxillofac. Surg. 2009; 38: 187–192.
Zanotti B, Zingaretti N, Verlicchi A, Robiony M, Alfieri A, Parodi PC. Cranioplasty: Review of Materials. J Craniofac Surg. 2016;27(8):2061-2072
Ayoub N, Ghassemi A, Rana M, et al. Evaluation of computer-assisted mandibular reconstruction with vascularized iliac crest bone graft compared to conventional surgery: a randomized prospective clinical trial. Trials. 2014;15:114.
Zhang WB, Yu Y, Wang Y, et al. Improving the accuracy of mandibular reconstruction with vascularized iliac crest flap: Role of computer-assisted techniques. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2016;44(11):1819-1827.

For product details such as indications, contraindications, warnings, and precautions, please consult the IFU.

150516-200819

© DePuy Synthes Companies 2021. All Rights Reserved.
This site is published by the DePuy Synthes Companies, which are solely responsible for its content.
This site is for visitors from Europe, Middle East and Africa.
The third party trademarks used herein are trademarks of their respective owners.