2022
DOI: 10.1016/j.jmbbm.2022.105291
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Semi-automated digital workflow to design and evaluate patient-specific mandibular reconstruction implants

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
14
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 12 publications
(15 citation statements)
references
References 63 publications
0
14
0
Order By: Relevance
“…[71, 106], others suggest that reduced muscle force may occur due to decreased chewing power after reconstruction surgery [22,26,41]. We believe, this topic needs more investigation since there is still a lack of information about post-operative muscle forces in patients especially, those with extensive mandibular defects [48,74].…”
Section: D) Main Measurements In Feamentioning
confidence: 97%
“…[71, 106], others suggest that reduced muscle force may occur due to decreased chewing power after reconstruction surgery [22,26,41]. We believe, this topic needs more investigation since there is still a lack of information about post-operative muscle forces in patients especially, those with extensive mandibular defects [48,74].…”
Section: D) Main Measurements In Feamentioning
confidence: 97%
“…The authors attributed this to the bending process inducing stress concentrations within parts of the plates with sharp angles. Moreover, the bending of plates may not provide a similar contour to that of the mandible and is highly dependent on the surgeon’s skill [ 81 ]. The bending of fixation plates can also increase the likeliness of fatigue failure.…”
Section: Challenges Associated With the Use Of Fixation Platesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Fatigue fracture risk is reduced as no bending is performed on the implant components during surgery. The technical and surgical complexity is reduced, and the aesthetic outcome is improved due to the matching of implant geometry to the original bone shape [ 81 ].…”
Section: Lattice-structured Mandibular Implants With Cage and Crib De...mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…An example of an objective function can be defined based on maximising the specific stiffness (i.e., stiffness-to-mass ratio), which can lead to lattices with similar anisotropic spongy-bone microarchitectures [ 53 ]. There are some optimisation models that have been developed by considering bone tissue adaptation processes [ 11 , 54 , 55 ] in order to create the optimal designs of microstructures of lattice parts that are often used for the creation of bone scaffolds and orthopaedic implants in biomedical engineering ( Figure 1 d) [ 56 , 57 , 58 , 59 ]. Strain energy can also be defined as another objective function for the TO of load-bearing lattice structures.…”
Section: Geometrical Design Of Latticesmentioning
confidence: 99%