Virtual Surgical Planning in Subscapular System Free Flap Reconstruction of Midface Defects

Swendseid, Brian; Roden, Dylan F.; Vimawala, Swar; Richa, Tony; Sweeny, Larissa; Goldman, Richard; Luginbuhl, Adam; Heffelfinger, Ryan; Khanna, Shachika; Curry, Joseph

doi:10.1016/j.oraloncology.2019.104508

Cited by 47 publications

(74 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…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%

“…The computer software that was used for the virtual planning of the maxillary reconstruction was Proplan/Surgicase CMF in forty-one cases, Mimics in nine cases, iPlan CMF in eight cases, Simplant Pro in five cases, 3-Matic in five cases, Rhino in four cases, InVesalius in four cases, Surfacer in two cases, and a free software format in one case. Swendseid et al used either ProPlan CMF, Stryker CMF, or IPS Case Designer for their 9 VSP cases, but they did not mention the exact distribution of their software usage [26]. A mirroring tool for contralateral (unaffected) maxilla projection on the maxillary defect was used in 13 cases.…”

Section: Study Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The primary outcome measurements of the bony segments in the included studies ranged between 0.44 mm and 7.8 mm and between 2.90 • and 6.96 • . In addition to the above-mentioned quantitative accuracy measurements, two studies determined the anatomical position of the bony segments compared with the pre-op anatomical situation or a mirrored reconstruction [26,27]. Both studies reported 100% of segments in the anatomical position in accordance with the planning.…”

Section: Cas Processmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

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

Section: Study Selectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Study Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Cas Processmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

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

show abstract

“…In the last forty years, due to the development of reconstructive techniques in the head and neck, there has been a significant improvement in the comprehensive treatment of these patients. Microsurgical techniques, virtual surgical planning (VSP), computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM), surgical navigation and advanced implantology have improved the aesthetic and functional results [3][4][5]. Free flaps are considered the treatment of choice in mandibular reconstruction for extensive bone defects [6].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The purpose of this study was to evaluate and compare the vertical reconstruction of the fibula flap with three different techniques and osseointegrated implants. The specific aims of this study were: (1) to compare the vertical bone reconstruction; (2) to compare perimplant bone resorption; (3) to compare the implant success rate; (4) to establish whether radiation therapy significantly affects vertical bone reconstruction and perimplant bone resorption; (5) to evaluate the association between radiotherapy and implant failure. The review of medical records and data collection and the subsequent analysis of the data collected is endorsed by the Hospital Ethics Committee at Gregorio Marañón General Hospital, Madrid, Spain.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Vertical Ridge Augmentation of Fibula Flap in Mandibular Reconstruction: A Comparison between Vertical Distraction, Double-Barrel Flap and Iliac Crest Graft

Cuéllar

Caicoya

Cuéllar

et al. 2020

JCM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Double-barrel flap, vertical distraction and iliac crest graft are used to reconstruct the vertical height of the fibula. Twenty-four patients with fibula flap were reconstructed comparing these techniques (eight patients in each group) in terms of height of bone, bone resorption, implant success rate and the effects of radiotherapy. The increase in vertical bone with vertical distraction, double-barrel flap and iliac crest was 12.5 ± 0.78 mm, 18.5 ± 0.5 mm, and 17.75 ± 0.6 mm, (p < 0.001). The perimplant bone resorption was 2.31 ± 0.12 mm, 1.23 ± 0.09 mm and 1.43 ± 0.042 mm (p < 0.001), respectively. There were significant differences in vertical bone reconstruction and bone resorption between double-barrel flap and vertical distraction and between iliac crest and vertical distraction (p < 0.001). The study did not show significant differences in implant failure (p = 0.346). Radiotherapy did not affect vertical bone reconstruction (p = 0.125) or bone resorption (p = 0.237) but it showed higher implant failure in radiated patients (p = 0.015). The double-barrel flap and iliac crest graft showed better stability in the height of bone and less bone resorption and higher implant success rates compared with vertical distraction. Radiation therapy did not affect the vertical bone reconstruction but resulted in a higher implant failure.

show abstract

3D printing for virtual surgical planning of nasoseptal flap skull‐base reconstruction: A proof‐of‐concept study

Kayastha

Wiznia

Manes

et al. 2023

Int Forum Allergy Rhinol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Virtual Surgical Planning in Subscapular System Free Flap Reconstruction of Midface Defects

Cited by 47 publications

References 23 publications

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

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

Vertical Ridge Augmentation of Fibula Flap in Mandibular Reconstruction: A Comparison between Vertical Distraction, Double-Barrel Flap and Iliac Crest Graft

3D printing for virtual surgical planning of nasoseptal flap skull‐base reconstruction: A proof‐of‐concept study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About