Using an In-House Approach to Computer-Assisted Design and Computer-Aided Manufacturing Reconstruction of the Maxilla

Numajiri, Toshiaki; Morita, Daiki; Nakamura, Hiroko; Tsujiko, Shoko; Yamochi, Ryo; Sowa, Yoshihiro; Toyoda, Kenji; Tsujikawa, Takahiro; Arai, Akihito; Yasuda, Makoto; Hirano, Shigeru

doi:10.1016/j.joms.2017.11.042

Cited by 26 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…No articles reported a statistically significant reduction in hospitalization duration between 3D printed and control groups; likewise, only 3 studies reported data on surgical lead time, which ranged from 3 to 34.6 days. 36,40,46 A summary of the temporal outcomes gathered for select surgeries is included in Table 5.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Three-Dimensional Printing for Craniomaxillofacial Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Applications and Logistical Outcomes

Heron

Zhu

Yusuf

et al. 2023

FACE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: Three-dimensional (3D) printing plays a rapidly expanding role in the field of craniomaxillofacial (CMF) surgery; however, the time and costs required to efficiently utilize this technology are highly variable. To better delineate the temporal and financial resources needed to establish an efficient workflow, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies utilizing patient-directed 3D-printed constructs in the setting of CMF surgery. Methods: A systematic review was performed using PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase. In total, 1679 articles were screened and 45 met inclusion criteria. Primary outcomes included the costs of 3D-printed constructs and the time required for virtual surgical planning (VSP), 3D printing, surgery, and hospitalization. Results: The aggregated data assessed 751 patients, 738 surgeries, and 1136 3D-printed constructs. The most common surgical indication was post-neoplastic reconstruction (n = 304), and the most common surgical procedure was mandibular reconstruction (n = 287). Printed constructs were as follows: contour models (44.1%), guides (30.9%), implants (12.5%), splints (12.1%), and prostheses (0.5%). Printing was the longest contributor to the preoperative workflow, averaging 401.6 minutes, while VSP required, on average, only 98.6 minutes. There was no significant difference in VSP time between constructs printed in-house and those contracted from commercial vendors. However, constructs printed in-house were significantly cheaper than those procured from vendors, averaging $252.20 and $2735.50, respectively ( P < .001). Of articles reporting intraoperative time (n = 19), 78.9% reported significant reductions when using 3D-printed constructs. Conclusion: 3D printing, especially in-house workflows, may reduce costs and improve efficiency for CMF surgery.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Three-Dimensional Printing for Craniomaxillofacial Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Applications and Logistical Outcomes

Heron

Zhu

Yusuf

et al. 2023

FACE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Three studies [21,22,24] reported about reconstruction of the orbital floor. None of these reported any quantitative measurements regarding the correct positioning of the eyeball.…”

Section: Evaluation Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…After screening the references for eligibility, 53 abstracts were selected and subsequently their full text was analyzed thoroughly. According to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, 12 studies were applicable to the purpose of this systematic review, describing a total of 67 maxillary reconstructions using CAS [8,11,[18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27]. Figure 1 shows the PRISMA flowchart of the literature search and study selection process.…”

Section: Study Selectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Accuracy of Computer-Assisted Surgery in Maxillary Reconstruction: A Systematic Review

Baar

Schipper

Forouzanfar

et al. 2021

JCM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Computer-assisted surgery (CAS) in maxillary reconstruction has proven its value regarding more predictable postoperative results. However, the accuracy evaluation methods differ between studies, and no meta-analysis has been performed yet. A systematic review was performed in the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases, using a Patient, Intervention, Comparison and Outcome (PICO) method: (P) patients in need of maxillary reconstruction using free osteocutaneous tissue transfer, (I) reconstructed according to a virtual plan in CAS software, (C) compared to the actual postoperative result, and (O) postoperatively measured by a quantitative accuracy assessment) search strategy, and was reported according to the PRISMA statement. We reviewed all of the studies that quantitatively assessed the accuracy of maxillary reconstructions using CAS. Twelve studies matched the inclusion criteria, reporting 67 maxillary reconstructions. All of the included studies compared postoperative 3D models to preoperative 3D models (revised to the virtual plan). The postoperative accuracy measurements mainly focused on the position of the fibular bony segments. Only approximate comparisons of postoperative accuracy between studies were feasible because of small differences in the postoperative measurement methods; the accuracy of the bony segment positioning ranged between 0.44 mm and 7.8 mm, and between 2.90° and 6.96°. A postoperative evaluation guideline to create uniformity in evaluation methods needs to be considered so as to allow for valid comparisons of postoperative results and to facilitate meta-analyses in the future. With the proper validation of the postoperative results, future research might explore more definitive evidence regarding the management and superiority of CAS in maxillary and midface reconstruction.

show abstract

“…In order to make up for so many deficiencies, we have to find another way. Therefore, Numajiri et al [5] concluded that the computer 3D modeling technology with low cost, high efficiency, easy storage and easy modification after completion has become a new expression of furniture modeling design and design process of main functional modules, as shown in Figure 1.…”

Section: New Ways Of Furniture Modeling Design Expressionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Design and Realization of Environmental Art System in View of Virtual Reality CAD Technology

Zhang¹,

Yang²

2022

CADandA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Auto CAD Technology has been widely used in architecture, interior, landscape, industry and other design fields. As a new design method, the traditional design method cannot fully express the designer's design ideas, and the advantage of three-dimensional modeling technology is that it can carry out simulation design according to people's thinking mode, so as to quickly and effectively solve many disadvantages existing in two-dimensional design, and make the designed furniture more economical, reasonable and reliable, To a great extent, it can shorten the development cycle of new products.

show abstract

Using an In-House Approach to Computer-Assisted Design and Computer-Aided Manufacturing Reconstruction of the Maxilla

Cited by 26 publications

References 12 publications

Three-Dimensional Printing for Craniomaxillofacial Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Applications and Logistical Outcomes

Three-Dimensional Printing for Craniomaxillofacial Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Applications and Logistical Outcomes

Accuracy of Computer-Assisted Surgery in Maxillary Reconstruction: A Systematic Review

Design and Realization of Environmental Art System in View of Virtual Reality CAD Technology

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About