BackgroundComputer-assisted surgery (CAS) has been introduced to mandible reconstruction with bular free ap in cutting guide placement. When CAS is cooperated with different plate xations, the results show various degrees of errors by which this study aimed to evaluate. MethodsMock surgeries were conducted in 3D-printed mandibles with either 2 types of defects; limited or extensive, reconstructed from 2 ameloblastoma patients. Three types of xations; miniplate, manually bending reconstruction plate and patient-speci c plates are tested, each of which was performed 3 times in each type of defects, adding up to 18 surgeries. One with the least errors was selected and applied with patients whose 3D-printed mandibles derived. Finally, in vivo errors were compared with the mock. ResultsIn limited defect, average errors show no statistical signi cance among all types. In extensive defect, patient-speci c plate had a signi cantly lower average condylar error than manually bending reconstruction plate and miniplate (8.09±2.52 mm vs. 25.49±2.72 and 23.13±13.54 mm, respectively).When patient-speci c plate was applied in vivo, the errors were not signi cantly different from the mock. ConclusionPatient-speci c plates cooperated with CAS shows the least errors. Nevertheless, manually bent reconstruction plates and miniplates could be applied in limited defects with caution.