Achille Tarsitano1, Leonardo Ciocca2, Roberto Scotti2, Claudio Marchetti3. 1. Maxillofacial Surgery Unit, S. Orsola-Malpighi Hospital, Department of Biomedical and Neuromotor Sciences, Alma Mater Studiorum University of Bologna, Via S. Vitale 59, 40125 Bologna, Italy. Electronic address: achille.tarsitano2@unibo.it. 2. Section of Prosthodontics, Department of Biomedical and Neuromotor Sciences, Alma Mater Studiorum University of Bologna, Via S. Vitale 59, 40125 Bologna, Italy. 3. Maxillofacial Surgery Unit, S. Orsola-Malpighi Hospital, Department of Biomedical and Neuromotor Sciences, Alma Mater Studiorum University of Bologna, Via S. Vitale 59, 40125 Bologna, Italy.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Virtual planning and guided surgery with customized reconstructive plates are becoming more and more common for mandibular reconstruction with fibular free flaps. Although the literature describes many potential applications, no systematic analyses have been made about morphological results regarding computer-aided reconstruction compared to traditional freehand bent plate. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In the present study, we propose a comparative study in this innovative field, analysing a case series of 30 CAD/CAM reconstructed mandibles, compared to traditional reconstructed mandibles, in terms of morphological results. All patients were evaluated by pre-operative and a post-operative CT scan. To evaluate the morphological results, several anatomical landmarks were measured on CT scan: 1) the midline deviation; 2) the amplitude variation, in grades, of the mandibular angle; 3) the bi-gonial diameter of the mandibular and 4) the chin protrusion. RESULTS: The mean differences registered between pre-operative and post-operative CT scan were significantly better for test group regarding mandibular angle (p = 0.034), bi-gonial diameter (p = 0.041), chin protrusion (p = 0.05). No significant differences were registered for midline deviation (p = 0.092). CONCLUSION: CAD/CAM reconstructive technique appears to be a valid method to accurately restore the pre-operative morphological situation.
INTRODUCTION: Virtual planning and guided surgery with customized reconstructive plates are becoming more and more common for mandibular reconstruction with fibular free flaps. Although the literature describes many potential applications, no systematic analyses have been made about morphological results regarding computer-aided reconstruction compared to traditional freehand bent plate. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In the present study, we propose a comparative study in this innovative field, analysing a case series of 30 CAD/CAM reconstructed mandibles, compared to traditional reconstructed mandibles, in terms of morphological results. All patients were evaluated by pre-operative and a post-operative CT scan. To evaluate the morphological results, several anatomical landmarks were measured on CT scan: 1) the midline deviation; 2) the amplitude variation, in grades, of the mandibular angle; 3) the bi-gonial diameter of the mandibular and 4) the chin protrusion. RESULTS: The mean differences registered between pre-operative and post-operative CT scan were significantly better for test group regarding mandibular angle (p = 0.034), bi-gonial diameter (p = 0.041), chin protrusion (p = 0.05). No significant differences were registered for midline deviation (p = 0.092). CONCLUSION: CAD/CAM reconstructive technique appears to be a valid method to accurately restore the pre-operative morphological situation.
Authors: Lucas M Ritschl; Paul Kilbertus; Florian D Grill; Matthias Schwarz; Jochen Weitz; Markus Nieberler; Klaus-Dietrich Wolff; Andreas M Fichter Journal: Front Oncol Date: 2021-09-24 Impact factor: 6.244
Authors: Achille Tarsitano; Francesco Ricotta; Paolo Spinnato; Anna Maria Chiesa; Maddalena Di Carlo; Anna Parmeggiani; Marco Miceli; Giancarlo Facchini Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2021-11-27 Impact factor: 4.241
Authors: Henriette L Möllmann; Laura Apeltrath; Nadia Karnatz; Max Wilkat; Erik Riedel; Daman Deep Singh; Majeed Rana Journal: Front Oncol Date: 2021-11-26 Impact factor: 6.244
Authors: Lucas M Ritschl; Thomas Mücke; Diandra Hart; Tobias Unterhuber; Victoria Kehl; Klaus-Dietrich Wolff; Andreas M Fichter Journal: Clin Oral Investig Date: 2020-10-06 Impact factor: 3.573