Evaluation of computer-assisted mandibular reconstruction with vascularized iliac crest bone graft compared to conventional surgery: a randomized prospective clinical trial

Trials

Ali Modabber²  Frank Hölzle²  Dieter Riediger²  Marcus Gerressen²  Majeed Rana¹  Alireza Ghassemi²  Nassim Ayoub² 

[1] Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Hannover Medical School, Carl-Neuberg-Straße 1, 30625 Hannover, Germany;Department of Oral, Maxillofacial and Plastic Facial Surgery, University Hospital of the RWTH Aachen, Pauwelsstraße 30, 52074 Aachen, Germany

关键词: Virtual planning;    Surgical guide;    Vascularized iliac crest bone graft;    Mandibular reconstruction;    Computer-assisted surgery;   

Others  :  807029
DOI  :  10.1186/1745-6215-15-114

 received in 2013-10-03, accepted in 2014-03-21,  发布年份 2014

【 摘 要 】

Background

Computer-assisted surgery plays an increasingly important role in mandibular reconstruction, ensuring the best possible masticatory function and aesthetic outcome.

Methods

Twenty patients were randomly assigned to computer-assisted or conventional mandibular reconstruction with vascularized iliac crest bone graft in a prospective study design.

Virtual surgical planning was based on preoperative CT-data using specific surgical planning software. A rapid prototyping guide transferred the virtual surgery plan to the operation site. During surgery the transplant ischemic time, reconstruction time, time for shaping the transplant and amount of bone removed were measured. Additionally, the difference in the intercondylar distance before and after surgery was calculated.

Results

Computer-assisted surgery shortened the time of transplant ischemia (P < 0.005) and defect reconstruction (P < 0.001) compared to conventional surgery. The time to saw and shape the transplant at the donor site was shorter using conventional surgery (P < 0.005); therefore, the overall time for surgery didn’t change (P = 0.527). In the computer-assisted group, the amount of bone harvested equaled the defect size, whereas the transplant size in the conventional group exceeded the defect site by 16.8 ± 5.6 mm (P < 0.001) on average. The intercondylar distance before compared to after surgery was less affected in the computer-assisted than in the conventional group (P < 0.001).

Conclusions

The presented study shows that computer-assisted surgery can help reduce the time for mandibular defect reconstruction and consequently the transplant ischemic time. In the computer-assisted group, the iliac crest donor site defect was downsized and the postoperative condyle position was less altered, reducing possible risks of postoperative complications and donor site morbidity.

Trial Registration

DRKS00005181.

【 授权许可】

   
2014 Ayoub et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

Figure 3.

Figure 4.

Figure 5.

Figure 6.

Figure 7.

Figure 8.

Figure 9.

Figure 10.

Figure 11.

Figure 12.

Figure 13.

Figure 14.

Figure 15.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Chubb G: Demonstration of cases and radiographs illustrating the technique employed and results obtained in the repair of fractured mandible by means of the free autogenous bone-graft. Proceedings of the Royal Society of Medicine 1921, 14:81-83.
• [2]Cordeiro PG, Disa JJ, Hidalgo DA, Hu QY: Reconstruction of the mandible with osseous free flaps: a 10-year experience with 150 consecutive patients. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery 1999, 104:1314-1320.
• [3]Disa JJ, Cordeiro PG: Mandible reconstruction with microvascular surgery. Seminars in Surgical Oncology 2000, 19:226-234.
• [4]Snyder CC, Bateman JM, Davis CW, Warden GD: Mandibulo-facial restoration with live osteocutaneous flaps. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery 1970, 45:14-19.
• [5]Riediger D: Restoration of masticatory function by microsurgically revascularized iliac crest bone grafts using enosseous implants. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery 1988, 81:861-877.
• [6]Ghassemi A, Ghassemi M, Modabber A, Knobe M, Fritz U, Riediger D, Gerressen M: Functional long-term results after the harvest of vascularised iliac bone grafts bicortically with the anterior superior iliac spine included. The British Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery 2013, 51:e47-50.
• [7]Foley BD, Thayer WP, Honeybrook A, McKenna S, Press S: Mandibular reconstruction using computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing: an analysis of surgical results. Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery 2013, 71:e111-119.
• [8]Kaim AH, Kirsch EC, Alder P, Bucher P, Hammer B: Preoperative accuracy of selective laser sintering (SLS) in craniofacial 3D modeling: comparison with patient CT data. RoFo: Fortschritte auf dem Gebiete der Röntgenstrahlen und der Nuklearmedizin 2009, 181:644-651.
• [9]Modabber A, Gerressen M, Ayoub N, Elvers D, Stromps JP, Riediger D, Hölzle F, Ghassemi A: Computer-assisted zygoma reconstruction with vascularized iliac crest bone graft. The International Journal of Medical Robotics + Computer Assisted Surgery 2013, 9:497-502.
• [10]Marentette LJ, Maisel RH: Three-dimensional CT reconstruction in midfacial surgery. Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery 1988, 98:48-52.
• [11]Ting JW, Rozen WM, Niumsawatt V, Baillieu C, Leung M, J CL: Developments in image-guided deep circumflex iliac artery flap harvest: a step-by-step guide and literature review. Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery 2014, 72:186-97.
• [12]Paleologos TS, Wadley JP, Kitchen ND, Thomas DG: Clinical utility and cost-effectiveness of interactive image-guided craniotomy: clinical comparison between conventional and image-guided meningioma surgery. Neurosurgery 2000, 47:40-47. Discussion 47–48
• [13]Schramm A, Gellrich N, Schmelzeisen R: Navigational Surgery of the Facial Skeleton. Berlin: Springer; 1997.
• [14]Modabber A, Gerressen M, Stiller MB, Noroozi N, Füglein A, Hölzle F, Riediger D, Ghassemi A: Computer-assisted mandibular reconstruction with vascularized iliac crest bone graft. Aesthetic Plastic Surgery 2012, 36:653-659.
• [15]Roser SM, Ramachandra S, Blair H, Grist W, Carlson GW, Christensen AM, Weimer KA, Steed MB: The accuracy of virtual surgical planning in free fibula mandibular reconstruction: comparison of planned and final results. Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery 2010, 68:2824-2832.
• [16]Ro EY, Ridge JA, Topham NS: Using stereolithographic models to plan mandibular reconstruction for advanced oral cavity cancer. The Laryngoscope 2007, 117:759-761.
• [17]Hallermann W, Olsen S, Bardyn T, Taghizadeh F, Banic A, Iizuka T: A new method for computer-aided operation planning for extensive mandibular reconstruction. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery 2006, 117:2431-2437.
• [18]Hou JS, Chen M, Pan CB, Tao Q, Wang JG, Wang C, Zhang B, Huang HZ: Immediate reconstruction of bilateral mandible defects: management based on computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing rapid prototyping technology in combination with vascularized fibular osteomyocutaneous flap. Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery 2011, 69:1792-1797.
• [19]Modabber A, Legros C, Rana M, Gerressen M, Riediger D, Ghassemi A: Evaluation of computer-assisted jaw reconstruction with free vascularized fibular flap compared to conventional surgery: a clinical pilot study. The International Journal of Medical Robotics + Computer Assisted Surgery 2012, 8:215-220.
• [20]Hölzle F, Watola A, Kesting MR, Nolte D, Wolff KD: Atrophy of free fibular grafts after mandibular reconstruction. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery 2007, 119:151-156.
• [21]Gateno J, Xia JJ, Teichgraeber JF, Christensen AM, Lemoine JJ, Liebschner MA, Gliddon MJ, Briggs ME: Clinical feasibility of computer-aided surgical simulation (CASS) in the treatment of complex cranio-maxillofacial deformities. Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery 2007, 65:728-734.
• [22]Troulis MJ, Everett P, Seldin EB, Kikinis R, Kaban LB: Development of a three-dimensional treatment planning system based on computed tomographic data. International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery 2002, 31:349-357.
• [23]Picard-Ami LA Jr, Thomson JG, Kerrigan CL: Critical ischemia times and survival patterns of experimental pig flaps. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery 1990, 86:739-743. Discussion 744–735
• [24]Xia JJ, Phillips CV, Gateno J, Teichgraeber JF, Christensen AM, Gliddon MJ, Lemoine JJ, Liebschner MA: Cost-effectiveness analysis for computer-aided surgical simulation in complex cranio-maxillofacial surgery. Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery 2006, 64:1780-1784.
• [25]Ghassemi A, Ghassemi M, Riediger D, Hilgers RD, Gerressen M: Comparison of donor-site engraftment after harvesting vascularized and nonvascularized iliac bone grafts. Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery 2009, 67:1589-1594.
• [26]Almasan OC, Hedesiu M, Baciut G, Leucuta DC, Baciut M: Disk and joint morphology variations on coronal and sagittal MRI in temporomandibular joint disorders. Clinical Oral Investigations 2013, 17:1243-1250.
• [27]Barrera-Mora JM, Espinar Escalona E, Abalos Labruzzi C, Llamas Carrera JM, Ballesteros EJ, Solano Reina E, Rocabado M: The relationship between malocclusion, benign joint hypermobility syndrome, condylar position and TMD symptoms. Cranio: The Journal of Craniomandibular Practice 2012, 30:121-130.
• [28]Ewers R, Schicho K, Undt G, Wanschitz F, Truppe M, Seemann R, Wagner A: Basic research and 12 years of clinical experience in computer-assisted navigation technology: a review. International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery 2005, 34:1-8.