Author:
Sun Qing,Zhu Zhihui,Meng Fanhao,Zhao Ruiqi,Li Xing,Long Xiao,Li Yansheng,Dong Haitao,Zhang Tao
Abstract
Abstract
Background
Mandibular defects can greatly affect patients' appearance and functionality. The preferred method to address this issue is reconstructive surgery using a fibular flap. The current personalized guide plate can improve the accuracy of osteotomy and reconstruction, but there are still some problems such as complex design process and time-consuming. Therefore, we modified the conventional template to serve the dual purpose of guiding the mandible and fibula osteotomy and facilitating the placement of the pre-bent titanium.
Methods
The surgery was simulated preoperatively using Computer-Aided Design (CAD) technology. The template and truncatable reconstruction model were produced in the laboratory using 3D printing. After pre-bending the titanium plate according to the contour, the reconstruction model was truncated and the screw trajectory was transferred to form a modified osteotomy and positioning integrative template system (MOPITS). Next, the patient underwent a composite template-guided vascularized fibula flap reconstruction of the mandible. All cases were reviewed for the total operative time and accuracy of surgery.
Results
The procedures involved 2–4 fibular segments in 15 patients, averaging 3 fibular segments per procedure. The osteotomy error is 1.01 ± 1.02 mm, while the reconstruction angular error is 1.85 ± 1.69°. The preoperative and postoperative data were compared, and both p > 0.05. During the same operation, implant placement was performed on four patients, with an average operative time of 487.25 ± 60.84 min. The remaining malignant tumor patients had an average operative time of 397.18 ± 73.09 min. The average postoperative hospital stay was 12.95 ± 3.29 days.
Conclusions
This study demonstrates the effectiveness of MOPITS in facilitating precise preoperative planning and intraoperative execution of fibula flap reconstruction. MOPITS represents a promising and reliable tool for reconstructive surgery, particularly for inexperienced surgeons navigating the challenges of mandible defect reconstruction.
Funder
National High Level Hospital Clinical Research Funding
Capital’s Funds for Health Improvement and Research
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference44 articles.
1. Zhang QF, Chun-Tang LV. Classifications and reconstruction of mandibular segmental defect. J Oral Maxillofacial Surg 2006;16(3)270–3.
2. Chatterjee D, Rahman Z, Harsha KN, et al. Reconstruction of complex oro-mandibular defects by four different modifications of free fibula osteomyocutaneous flap: A prudent alternative to multiple flaps. J Plastic Reconstruct Aesthetic Surg JPRAS. 2022;75(9):3346–55.
3. Chan A, Sambrook P, Munn Z, et al. Effectiveness of computer-assisted virtual planning, cutting guides and pre-engineered plates on outcomes in mandible fibular free flap reconstructions: a systematic review protocol. JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep. 2019;17(10):2136–51.
4. Fliss E, Yanko R, Bracha G, et al. The evolution of the free fibula flap for head and neck reconstruction: 21 years of experience with 128 flaps. J Reconstr Microsurg. 2021;37(4):372–9.
5. Zhang T, Zhang Y, Li YS, et al. Application of CTA and CAD\CAM techniques in mandible reconstruction with free fibula flap. Zhonghua Zheng Xing Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2006;22(5):325–7.