| Literature DB >> 28177329 |
M Berrone1, E Crosetti2, P L Tos3, M Pentenero4, G Succo5.
Abstract
Virtual surgical planning technology in head and neck surgery is witnessing strong growth. In the literature, the validity of the method from the point of view of accuracy and clinical utility has been widely documented, especially for bone modelling. To date, however, with its increased use in head and neck oncology, and consequently the increased need for bone and soft tissue reconstruction, is important to carry out the virtual programme considering not only bone reconstruction but also all aspects related to the reconstruction of soft tissue using composite flaps. We describe our approach to virtual planning in the case of composite flaps. The study reports six consecutive patients with malignant disease requiring mandibular bone and soft tissue reconstruction using fibular osteocutaneous flaps. In all six patients, the resection and reconstruction were planned virtually focusing on the position of cutaneous perforator vessels in order to schedule fibula cutting guides. There were no complications in all six cases. The technique described allowed us to schedule composite fibula flaps in mandibular reconstruction virtually with good accuracy of the position of the bone segment in relation to the cutaneous paddle, important for soft tissue reconstruction. Despite the limited number of cases, the preliminary results of the study suggest that this protocol is useful in virtual programmes using composite flaps in mandibular reconstruction. Further investigations are needed. © Copyright by Società Italiana di Otorinolaringologia e Chirurgia Cervico-Facciale, Rome, Italy.Entities:
Keywords: Computer-assisted mandibularzzm321990reconstruction; Fibula harvestin; Fibular osteofasciocutaneous flap; Mandibular reconstruction; Virtual surgical planning
Mesh:
Year: 2016 PMID: 28177329 PMCID: PMC5317125 DOI: 10.14639/0392-100X-1282
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital ISSN: 0392-100X Impact factor: 2.124
Preoperative demographic data, planned fibular segments, skin island maximum diameter, distance between malleolus and skin perforating vessel, and ischaemia time.
| Sex | Age, years | Pathol | U.C. | Res, cm | # seg | SP diam, cm | Distance M P, cm | Ischaemia time, min |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| M | 59 | SCC | BS | 8.859 | 2 | 7.0 | 14.5 | 60 |
| F | 69 | SCC | BS | 7.759 | 2 | 8 | 10.7 | 65 |
| F | 44 | SCC | B | 7.685 | 1 | 8 | 12.3 | 73 |
| F | 71 | SCC | BS | 7.064 | 2 | 6 | 11.2 | 73 |
| M | 57 | SCC | BSB | 11.669 | 3 | 10 | 13.6 | 80 |
| M | 69 | SCC | BS | 7.728 | 2 | 10 | 16.9 | 75 |
Pathol: pathology affecting the mandibular bone; SCC: squamous cell carcinoma; U.C.: Urken classification of mandibular defects: C, condyle; R, ramus; B, body; SH, symphysis (half); S, symphysis; Res: length of planned resection (cm); # seg: number of fibular segments planned for mandibular reconstruction; SP diam: skin paddle maximum diameter (cm); Distance M P: distance between malleolus and skin perforator vessel (cm); Ischaemia time: time calculated from pedicle detachment to flap revascularisation (min).
Fibula modelling and mounting on the plate performed before detaching the vascular pedicle.
Fig. 1.a) Preoperative measurements of the distance between the malleolus and the perforator vessel; b) Preliminary measurements of the resective and reconstructive programme from CT scan; c) Reproduction of the distance between the malleolus and the perforator vessel on the virtual programme for fibula harvesting; d) Mandibular cutting guides.
Fig. 2.a) Mandibular and fibular cutting guides were provided with fixation holes for temporary fixation and trocar guides for PSP fixation screws; b) Mandibular osteotomies completed with soft tissue resection; c) Preoperative measurements of virtual surgical planning and of the distance between the malleolus and the perforator vessel are drawn on the leg skin; d) Virtual surgical planning measurements.
Fig. 3.a) Check of fibula cutting guides; b) Modification of the fibula cutting guides; c) Modified guide not interfering with perforator vessels; d) Fibula modelled before detaching the vascular pedicle.
Fig. 4.a) Shaped fibula secured to the PSP in the planned position; b) Fibula and plate fixed to the native mandible; c) Extremely precise bone-to-bone contact and positioning; d) Extremely precise bone-to-bone contact.
Fig. 5.a) Pleasant aesthetic final result; b) Good intraoral anatomy and morphology.