Mandible reconstruction with free fibula flaps: Accuracy of a cost-effective modified semicomputer-assisted surgery compared with computer-assisted surgery - A retrospective study. Issue 3 (March 2022)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Lai, Yongzhen; Wang, Chengyong; Mao, Chuanqing; Lu, Meng; Ouyang, Qiming; Fang, Yihong; Cai, Zhiyu; Chen, Weihui
• Is Part Of: Journal of cranio-maxillofacial surgery. Volume 50:Issue 3(2022)
• Page Start: 274
• Page End: 280
• Publication Date: 2022-03
• Subjects: Computer-assisted surgery -- Modified semi-computer-assisted surgery -- Free fibular flap -- Mandibular reconstruction -- Accuracy -- Efficiency; Skull -- Surgery -- Periodicals; Maxilla -- Surgery -- Periodicals; Face -- Surgery -- Periodicals; Surgery, Plastic -- Periodicals; Maxilla -- surgery -- Periodicals; Face -- surgery -- Periodicals; Skull -- surgery -- Periodicals; Oral Surgical Procedures -- Periodicals; Reconstructive Surgical Procedures -- Periodicals; Surgery, Plastic -- Periodicals; Surgery, Oral -- Periodicals; Electronic journals; 617.514
• DOI: 10.1016/j.jcms.2021.12.004
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1010-5182

Abstract

Abstract: A new individualized, cost-effective, modified semi-computer-assisted surgery (MSCAS) concept for free fibular flap mandibular reconstruction is reported and compared with the computer-assisted surgery (CAS) concept. Patients were divided into two groups and retrospectively reviewed. In the MSCAS and CAS groups, intraoperative guides were created using computer-aided design with manual fabrication and computer-aided design and manufacturing, respectively. Differences in specific linear and angular parameters on pre- and postoperative computed tomography scans were calculated for morphometric comparison, and clinical parameters and efficiency were analysed. Results: Eighteen patients (CAS, 7; MSCAS, 11), were included. The morphometric comparison showed no significant differences between the groups. The mean deviation of the mandibular ramus length, body length, width 1 and width 2 was 0.82 ± 0.29 mm, 1.84 ± 0.43 mm, 1.89 ± 0.61 mm and 1.45 ± 0.61 mm in the CAS group versus 1.56 ± 0.54 mm, 1.72 ± 0.33 mm, 2.24 ± 0.55 mm and 2.36 ± 0.50 mm in the MSCAS group (p = 0.7804, p = 0.9997, p = 0.9814 and p = 0.6334). The mean deviation of the sagittal, axial and coronal mandibular angles was 1.56 ± 0.48°, 1.93 ± 0.50° and 2.15 ± 0.72° in the CAS group versus 2.19 ± 0.35°, 1.86 ± 0.35° and 1.94 ± 0.55° in the MSCAS group (p = 0.7594, p = 0.9996 and p = 0.9871). There were no significant differences in clinical parameters, efficiency or postoperative complications between the groups. Conclusion: The accuracy and operative efficiency of the MSCAS concept are comparable to those of the more expensive CAS concept. Therefore, in times of increasing clinical costs, this concept might be an adequate and inexpensive alternative to preoperative CAS.