Implementation of 3D Printing and Computer-Aided Design and Manufacturing (CAD/CAM) in Craniofacial Reconstruction

Abstract

Introduction: The need for precision in craniomaxillofacial surgery has necessitated the evolution of new technology to improve patient outcomes and subsequently augment the road to recovery. Surgical planning has variables that may influence outcomes, including the image quality, image acquisition and image processing. Our review focuses on the advancement of three dimensional (3D) printing to create patient-specific constructs and therefore aims to study the current trends in the implementation of 3-D printing in craniofacial surgeries, including preferred 3-D printing techniques and materials, computer-aided design and manufacturing techniques, and outcomes as measured by recent studies. Methods: The authors conducted a systematic review following PRISMA guidelines to query PubMed, Embase, Cochrane library and ProQuest electronic databases. Mesh combinations and synonyms of “3Dprinting”, “3Dprinted”, “Craniofacial” were used. The authors included all original human studies that focused on the surgical implementation of 3D-printed implants for craniofacial defects. Results: After screening 1253 studies, the authors included 49 articles consisting of a total of 745 subjects for qualitative analysis. Titanium (n = 13) and polycaprolactone (n = 6) were the most common 3D printed materials studied while Color Jet Printing (n = 12) and Stereolithography (n = 11) were the most common techniques. All studies that compared implants acquired by 3D printing with those acquired by conventional approaches showed a significantly better prognosis, and reductions in operative time, length of stay, and immediate complications. Conclusions: The use of patient-specific alternative materials, planning software and 3-D printing techniques shows satisfactory results in craniofacial reconstruction. Future studies should include standard levels of objective measurements to make better comparisons.

The Carbon Footprint of the Craniomaxillofacial Surgeon: A Single Center Analysis of 3D-Printed Constructs

“…By contrast, high melting point thermoplastics and metal alloys have more robust mechanical properties but are resource-intensive to produce. 8,17 Several print media exist for clinical printing, each with advantages and disadvantages for both patients and the environment. For example, acrylic resins were the most common materials used for 3D printing in CMF surgery at our institution.…”

Donor site morbidity after computer assisted surgical reconstruction of the mandible using deep circumflex iliac artery grafts: a cross sectional study

“…By segmentation of the anatomical structures and three-dimensional visualization of the surgical sites, meticulous preoperative planning can be performed using CAD/CAM. Besides mere visualization purposes CAD/CAM transfer the surgical plan into the operation theatre using 3D-printed drilling and cutting guides and can therefore facilitate surgery [ 27 ].…”

Three-dimensional Printing Technologies in Craniofacial Plastic Surgery: An Institutional Experience

“…T he craniofacial skeleton surgeries are challenging due to the complex anatomy, adjacence to vital structures, and the importance of personal social function, significantly impacting individuals' quality of life. 1 Therefore, the repair and improvement of the craniofacial skeleton require a high degree of precision. Craniofacial plastic surgery, including treatment of congenital deformities, trauma repair, or cosmetic surgery, aims to improve its esthetics and function, requiring precise preoperative design and intraoperative translation of virtual design solutions.…”

“…The craniofacial skeleton surgeries are challenging due to the complex anatomy, adjacence to vital structures, and the importance of personal social function, significantly impacting individuals’ quality of life 1. Therefore, the repair and improvement of the craniofacial skeleton require a high degree of precision.…”