Comparison of patient specific implant reconstruction vs conventional titanium mesh reconstruction of orbital fractures using a novel method.

J Craniomaxillofac Surg

Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Rambam Health Care Campus, Haifa, Israel; Bruce Rappaport Faculty of Medicine, Technion-Israel Institute of Technology, Haifa, Israel. Electronic address:

Published: April 2024

AI Article Synopsis

  • The study compares the effectiveness of patient-specific implants (PSI) versus traditional titanium mesh for reconstructing orbital fractures, highlighting the advantages of PSI in accuracy.
  • Three methods of virtual reconstruction were utilized, each suited for different types of fractures, and the results were analyzed to assess functional and aesthetic outcomes.
  • Common complications and strategies for avoiding them are outlined, emphasizing the importance of 3D planning and analysis in maxillofacial surgery.

Article Abstract

To compare the reconstruction of orbital fractures using patient-specific implants (PSI) and conventional pre-formed titanium mesh; to develop a method of three-dimensional (3D) superimposition and analysis of the reconstructed orbits; and to present the pitfalls in 3D planning of orbital PSI and how to avoid them. This was a retrospective study of patients with orbital fractures who were treated in our institution between the years 2022 and 2023 using PSI or conservative prefabricated titanium mesh. Three different methods for virtual reconstruction of orbital fractures were used and are detailed with advantages, disadvantages and indications. Data acquired included age, gender, method of reconstruction, functional outcomes and aesthetic outcomes. 3D analysis for accuracy of reconstruction was performed. A total of 23 patients were included; 12 were treated using PSI and 11 using prefabricated titanium meshes. There were 8 male and 4 female patients in the PSI group comparted to 5 and 6 in the prefabricated group. All three virtual methods for reconstruction were used successfully, each with the proper indications. When comparing PSI reconstruction to conventional mesh, a significant difference in accuracy was observed; PSI cases showed an inaccuracy of 0.58 mm compared to 1.54 mm with the conventional method. Complications are presented, and tips for avoiding them are detailed. Three different methods for virtual reconstruction were used successfully; automated computerized reconstruction is used for small defects, repositioning is the superior method for non-comminuted cases while mirroring is the method of choice in comminuted fractures. 3D analysis can be performed using a novel method detailed in this report. PSI reconstruction showed superior results, indicating it should be the method of choice when possible. Pitfalls are presented and approaches to prevent them are discussed. Orbital reconstruction is a very important entity in maxillofacial surgery with crucial functional and esthetical implications, and one should use virtual planning and PSI implants, as they significantly improve outcomes.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcms.2024.02.002DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

orbital fractures
16
reconstruction
12
titanium mesh
12
reconstruction orbital
12
psi
9
reconstruction conventional
8
method
8
novel method
8
prefabricated titanium
8
three methods
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!