Literature DB >> 28943180

CAD-CAM plates versus conventional fixation plates for primary mandibular reconstruction: A biomechanical in vitro analysis.

Carsten Rendenbach1, Kay Sellenschloh2, Lucca Gerbig3, Michael M Morlock2, Benedicta Beck-Broichsitter4, Ralf Smeets3, Max Heiland4, Gerd Huber2, Henning Hanken3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: CAD/CAM reconstruction plates have become a viable option for mandible reconstruction. The aim of this study was to determine whether CAD/CAM plates provide higher fatigue strength compared with conventional fixation systems.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: 1.0 mm miniplates, 2.0 mm conventional locking plates (DePuy Synthes, Umkirch, Germany), and 2.0 mm CAD/CAM plates (Materialise, Leuven, Belgium/DePuy Synthes) were used to reconstruct a polyurethane mandible model (Synbone, Malans, CH) with cortical and cancellous bone equivalents. Mastication was simulated via cyclic dynamic testing using a universal testing machine (MTS, Bionix, Eden Prairie, MN, USA) until material failure reached a rate of 1 Hz with increasing loads on the left side.
RESULTS: No significant difference was found between the groups until a load of 300 N. At higher loads, vertical displacement differed increasingly, with a poorer performance of miniplates (p = 0.04). Plate breakage occurred in miniplates and conventional locking plates. Screw breakage was recorded as the primary failure mechanism in CAD/CAM plates. Stiffness was significantly higher with the CAD/CAM plates (p = 0.04).
CONCLUSION: CAD/CAM plates and reconstruction plates provide higher fatigue strength than miniplates, and stiffness is highest in CAD/CAM systems. All tested fixation methods seem sufficiently stable for mandible reconstruction.
Copyright © 2017 European Association for Cranio-Maxillo-Facial Surgery. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Biomechanics; CAD/CAM technique; Fatigue strength; Fibula free flap; Fixation; Primary mandible reconstruction

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28943180     DOI: 10.1016/j.jcms.2017.08.024

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Craniomaxillofac Surg        ISSN: 1010-5182            Impact factor:   2.078


  13 in total

1.  Evaluation and reduction of magnetic resonance imaging artefacts induced by distinct plates for osseous fixation: an in vitro study @ 3 T.

Authors:  Carsten Rendenbach; Max Schoellchen; Julie Bueschel; Tobias Gauer; Jan Sedlacik; Daniel Kutzner; Pekka K Vallittu; Max Heiland; Ralf Smeets; Jens Fiehler; Susanne Siemonsen
Journal:  Dentomaxillofac Radiol       Date:  2018-05-23       Impact factor: 2.419

Review 2.  Mini-plate versus reconstruction bar fixation for oncologic mandibular reconstruction with free fibula flaps: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Nikhil Sobti; Kaleem S Ahmed; Thais Polanco; Marina Chilov; Marc A Cohen; Jay Boyle; Farooq Shahzad; Evan Matros; Jonas A Nelson; Robert J Allen
Journal:  J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg       Date:  2022-05-06       Impact factor: 3.022

3.  Mechanical Fatigue Performance of Patient-Specific Polymer Plates in Oncologic Mandible Reconstruction.

Authors:  Julian Lommen; Lara Schorn; Christoph Sproll; Norbert R Kübler; Luis Fernando Nicolini; Ricarda Merfort; Ayimire Dilimulati; Frank Hildebrand; Majeed Rana; Johannes Greven
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2022-06-09       Impact factor: 4.964

4.  Improving mandibular reconstruction by using topology optimization, patient specific design and additive manufacturing?-A biomechanical comparison against miniplates on human specimen.

Authors:  Jan J Lang; Mirjam Bastian; Peter Foehr; Michael Seebach; Jochen Weitz; Constantin von Deimling; Benedikt J Schwaiger; Carina M Micheler; Nikolas J Wilhelm; Christian U Grosse; Marco Kesting; Rainer Burgkart
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-06-08       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  Biomechanical In Vitro Study on the Stability of Patient-Specific CAD/CAM Mandibular Reconstruction Plates: A Comparison Between Selective Laser Melted, Milled, and Hand-Bent Plates.

Authors:  Robin Kasper; Karsten Winter; Sebastian Pietzka; Alexander Schramm; Frank Wilde
Journal:  Craniomaxillofac Trauma Reconstr       Date:  2020-08-28

6.  Patient-Specific Mandibular Reconstruction Plates Increase Accuracy and Long-Term Stability in Immediate Alloplastic Reconstruction of Segmental Mandibular Defects.

Authors:  A N Zeller; M T Neuhaus; L V M Weissbach; M Rana; A Dhawan; F M Eckstein; N C Gellrich; R M Zimmerer
Journal:  J Maxillofac Oral Surg       Date:  2020-01-03

7.  Comparison of the Accuracy and Clinical Parameters of Patient-Specific and Conventionally Bended Plates for Mandibular Reconstruction.

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

8.  A Marriage Between Plastic Surgery and Nano-Medicine: Future Directions for Restoration in Mandibular Reconstruction and Skin Defects.

Authors:  Ava Brozovich; Elizabeth Andrews; Ennio Tasciotti; Jesse C Selber
Journal:  Front Surg       Date:  2020-03-27

Review 9.  Complication of osteo reconstruction by utilizing free vascularized fibular bone graft.

Authors:  Qifeng Ou; Panfeng Wu; Zhengbing Zhou; Ding Pan; Ju-Yu Tang
Journal:  BMC Surg       Date:  2020-10-02       Impact factor: 2.102

10.  Retrospective analysis of complications in 190 mandibular resections and simultaneous reconstructions with free fibula flap, iliac crest flap or reconstruction plate: a comparative single centre study.

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

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.