Philippe Korn1, Philipp Jehn2, Narin Nejati-Rad3, Jan Winterboer2, Nils-Claudius Gellrich4, Simon Spalthoff2. 1. Consultant, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany. Electronic address: korn.philippe@mh-hannover.de. 2. Consultant, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany. 3. Student, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany. 4. Department Head, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The use of patient-specific implants for reconstruction of complex orbital floor defects is increasing and requires communication with an industry partner, which warrants investigation. Therefore, the aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of in-house training of engineers on such communication as well as to identify frequent sources of problems and their solutions for improvement of the implant-planning workflow. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cross-sectional study and enrolled a sample of patients who had undergone orbital reconstruction with patient-specific implants between 2017 and 2020. The predictor variables were in-house training (additional training completed in hospital or not) and implant complexity (complex [multiwalled implants] vs less complex [isolated orbital floor reconstructions]). The outcome variables were duration of communication, message length, and need for synchronous communication or modifications to the original design. Descriptive, univariate, and multivariate statistics were computed, and statistical significance was set at a P value of < 0.05. RESULTS: This study included the data of 66 patients (48 men and 18 women, average age: 42.27 years). The complexity of the implant statistically significantly increased the duration of the communication (8.76 vs 16.03 days; P = .004). In 72.73%, the initial design had to be changed. Engineers trained in house required less communication to plan less-complex implants and generally needed fewer corrections to the original design (P = .020 and P = .036, respectively). Problems during planning were observed in 25.76% of the cases, with an insufficient diagnostic 3-dimensional data set being the most common (15.15%). CONCLUSIONS: In-house training of engineers is time-saving while planning the workflow for patient-specific implants, especially in less-complex cases, given that design changes are not needed often. The high rate of data sets that were insufficient for planning patient-specific implants suggests that diagnostic 3-dimensional data sets should already meet the requirements for such planning.
PURPOSE: The use of patient-specific implants for reconstruction of complex orbital floor defects is increasing and requires communication with an industry partner, which warrants investigation. Therefore, the aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of in-house training of engineers on such communication as well as to identify frequent sources of problems and their solutions for improvement of the implant-planning workflow. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cross-sectional study and enrolled a sample of patients who had undergone orbital reconstruction with patient-specific implants between 2017 and 2020. The predictor variables were in-house training (additional training completed in hospital or not) and implant complexity (complex [multiwalled implants] vs less complex [isolated orbital floor reconstructions]). The outcome variables were duration of communication, message length, and need for synchronous communication or modifications to the original design. Descriptive, univariate, and multivariate statistics were computed, and statistical significance was set at a P value of < 0.05. RESULTS: This study included the data of 66 patients (48 men and 18 women, average age: 42.27 years). The complexity of the implant statistically significantly increased the duration of the communication (8.76 vs 16.03 days; P = .004). In 72.73%, the initial design had to be changed. Engineers trained in house required less communication to plan less-complex implants and generally needed fewer corrections to the original design (P = .020 and P = .036, respectively). Problems during planning were observed in 25.76% of the cases, with an insufficient diagnostic 3-dimensional data set being the most common (15.15%). CONCLUSIONS: In-house training of engineers is time-saving while planning the workflow for patient-specific implants, especially in less-complex cases, given that design changes are not needed often. The high rate of data sets that were insufficient for planning patient-specific implants suggests that diagnostic 3-dimensional data sets should already meet the requirements for such planning.
Authors: Simon Spalthoff; Narin Nejati-Rad; Björn Rahlf; Philipp Jehn; Nils-Claudius Gellrich; Fritjof Lentge; Philippe Korn Journal: Front Oncol Date: 2022-09-21 Impact factor: 5.738