Ho-Hyun Brian Sun1, Heshaam Fallah2. 1. Peninsula Oral Surgery San Jose, San Jose, CA; College of Dental Medicine, Western University of Health Sciences, Pomona, CA, USA; Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Arthur A. Dugoni School of Dentistry, University of the Pacific, San Francisco, CA, USA. 2. Division of Maxillofacial Surgery, Kaiser Permanente Oakland Medical Center, Oakland, CA, USA.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Patient-specific implants (PSIs) are accurate, efficient alternatives to traditional plate fixation. They are well-suited for use in procedures that require the utmost accuracy, stability, and efficiency. Although PSIs have demonstrated such qualities in craniomaxillofacial reconstruction, they have so far found limited utilization elsewhere. CASE PRESENTATION: We explored the departmental protocol for Lefort 1 PSI orthognathic surgery at a high-volume, tertiary referral center. Three cases were selected that matched predetermined criteria, which included treatment by the same surgical team, concurrent Lefort 1 osteotomy and bilateral sagittal split osteotomy, Angle's type 3 malocclusion, lack of interdental osteotomies, and American Society of Anesthesiologists classification 2 or less without metabolic or osseous diseases. The operative outcomes from these patients were then compared to similar cases also meeting the same criteria and conducted within the same time period. CONCLUSION: The use of PSI in Lefort 1 osteotomy is associated with anatomically sound designs that could contribute to postoperative stability of the jaws. They also have not shown increased rates of complications such as infection, dehiscence, or relapse at 6 weeks postoperatively but may in fact decrease the operative duration. These findings are consistent with the results gleaned from literature on the use of PSI in craniomaxillofacial reconstruction.
INTRODUCTION: Patient-specific implants (PSIs) are accurate, efficient alternatives to traditional plate fixation. They are well-suited for use in procedures that require the utmost accuracy, stability, and efficiency. Although PSIs have demonstrated such qualities in craniomaxillofacial reconstruction, they have so far found limited utilization elsewhere. CASE PRESENTATION: We explored the departmental protocol for Lefort 1 PSI orthognathic surgery at a high-volume, tertiary referral center. Three cases were selected that matched predetermined criteria, which included treatment by the same surgical team, concurrent Lefort 1 osteotomy and bilateral sagittal split osteotomy, Angle's type 3 malocclusion, lack of interdental osteotomies, and American Society of Anesthesiologists classification 2 or less without metabolic or osseous diseases. The operative outcomes from these patients were then compared to similar cases also meeting the same criteria and conducted within the same time period. CONCLUSION: The use of PSI in Lefort 1 osteotomy is associated with anatomically sound designs that could contribute to postoperative stability of the jaws. They also have not shown increased rates of complications such as infection, dehiscence, or relapse at 6 weeks postoperatively but may in fact decrease the operative duration. These findings are consistent with the results gleaned from literature on the use of PSI in craniomaxillofacial reconstruction.
Authors: Thomas Rückschloß; Oliver Ristow; Michael Müller; Reinald Kühle; Sebastian Zingler; Michael Engel; Jürgen Hoffmann; Christian Freudlsperger Journal: J Craniomaxillofac Surg Date: 2019-03-02 Impact factor: 2.078
Authors: Christopher L Kalmar; Laura S Humphries; Carrie E Zimmerman; Giap H Vu; Jordan W Swanson; Scott P Bartlett; Jesse A Taylor Journal: Plast Reconstr Surg Date: 2020-11 Impact factor: 4.730
Authors: Marcus Heufelder; Frank Wilde; Sebastian Pietzka; Frank Mascha; Karsten Winter; Alexander Schramm; Majeed Rana Journal: J Craniomaxillofac Surg Date: 2017-07-08 Impact factor: 2.078