It's a much better procedure than standard jaw surgery for a huge number of reasons. I suspect it will become standard in the future.
Arnett/Gunson don't agree. From the article "Drs. G. William Arnett and Michael J. Gunson on Esthetic Treatment Planning for Orthognathic Surgery"
"Distraction osteogenesis, in our opinion, will not substitute for conventional ortho-gnathic surgery. Well-done orthognathic surgery with rigid fixation produces occlusal, facial, and airway results that are the gold standard. Distraction osteogenesis does not, and will not, treat the bite in three planes of space with the same quality and precision as conventional, well-done orthognathic surgery. When thinking of distraction, we must realize its limitations. Establishment of precise vectors for distraction is exceedingly difficult. Moving a complex object such as the mandible to within 1mm of accuracy is a veritable impossibility with distraction. There are also severe limits on achieving final occlusion compared with traditional orthognathic surgery. What are the valid clinical reasons to avoid the Le Fort I and sagittal osteotomies in favor of distraction? Previously held beliefs that distraction was kinder to nerve and joint tissues have been proved false. We must be careful not to lower our standards for the sake of using new technology"
