Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online 2021-6
Biomechanical In Vitro Study on the Stability of Patient-Specific CAD/CAM Mandibular Reconstruction Plates: A Comparison Between Selective Laser Melted,Milled,and Hand-Bent Plates
Plate fractures are a recurrent problem in alloplastic mandibular reconstruction. Hypothetically it can be assumed that computer-aided design (CAD)/computer-aided manufacturing (CAM) reconstruction plates have a higher stability than conventional hand-bent plates. The aim of the study was to compare additive and subtractive fabricated CAD/CAM mandibular reconstruction plates as well as conventional plates with regard to their biomechanical properties.
Methods:
In a chewing simulator, plates of 2 conventional locking plate systems and 2 CAD/CAM-fabricated plate systems were compared. The plates were loaded in a fatigue test. The maximum number of cycles until plate fracture and the plate stiffness were compared.
Results:
While all conventional plates fractured at a maximum load between 150 and 210 N (Newton) after a number of cycles between 40 000 and 643 000, none of the CAD/CAM plates broke despite a nearly doubled load of 330 N and 2 million cycles. Both CAD/CAM systems proved to be significantly superior to the hand-bent plates. There was no difference between the 2 CAD/CAM systems.
Conclusions:
Concerning the risk of plate fracture, patient-specific CAD/CAM reconstruction plates appear to have a significant advantage over conventional hand-bent plates in alloplastic mandibular reconstruction.
BakerAMcMahonJParmarS. Immediate reconstruction of continuity defects of the mandible after tumor surgery. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2001;59(11):1333–1339.
2.
LinsenSSchmidt-BeerUGrünerMKoeckB. CMD-Beschwerden bei Patienten mit Defekten im Kieferbereich. Dtsch Zahnaerztl Z. 2005;60:376–387.
3.
BianchiBFerriAFerrariS, et al.Reconstruction of lateral through and through oro-mandibular defects following oncological resections. Microsurgery. 2010;30(7):517–525.
4.
van GemertJTMvan EsRJJRosenbergAJWPvan der BiltAKooleRvan CannEM. Free vascularized flaps for reconstruction of the mandible: complications, success, and dental rehabilitation. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2012;70(7):1692–1698.
5.
UrkenMLBuchbinderDWeinbergH, et al.Functional evaluation following microvascular oromandibular reconstruction of the oral cancer patient: a comparative study of reconstructed and nonreconstructed patients. Laryngoscope. 2015;125(7):1512.
TorabiSJChouairiFDinisJAlperovichM. Impact of advanced age on microvascular reconstruction of the lower facial third: an American College of Surgeons NSQIP study. Microsurgery. 2019;39(6):487–496.
8.
SugiuraYSarukawaSHayasakaJKamochiHNoguchiTMoriY. Mandibular reconstruction with free fibula flaps in the elderly: a retrospective evaluation. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2018;47(8):983–989.
9.
HeadCAlamDSercarzJA, et al.Microvascular flap reconstruction of the mandible: a comparison of bone grafts and bridging plates for restoration of mandibular continuity. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2003;129(1):48–54.
10.
WeiFCelikNYangWChenIChangYChenH. Complications after reconstruction by plate and soft-tissue free flap in composite mandibular defects and secondary salvage reconstruction with osteocutaneous flap. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2003;112(1):37–42.
11.
DannemannSAbu-IdMHKreuschT. Die zweizeitige Unterkieferrekonstruktion mit einer 2,7-mm-Überbrückungsplatte. Mund Kiefer Gesichtschir. 2007;11(6):339–343.
12.
FreitagVHellBFischerH. Experience with AO reconstruction plates after partial mandibular resection involving its continuity. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 1991;19(5):191–198.
13.
IrishJCGullanePJGilbertRWBrownDHBirtBDBoydJB. Primary mandibular reconstruction with the titanium hollow screw reconstruction plate: evaluation of 51 cases. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1995;96(1):93–99.
14.
ArdenRLRachelJDMarksSCDangK. Volume-length impact of lateral jaw resections on complication rates. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1999;125(1):68–72.
15.
ColettiDPOrdRLiuX. Mandibular reconstruction and second-generation locking reconstruction plates: outcome of 110 patients. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2009;38(9):960–963.
16.
MaurerPEckertAWKriwalskyMSSchubertJ. Scope and limitations of methods of mandibular reconstruction: a long-term follow-up. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2010;48(2):100–104.
17.
LiuSCaiZZhangJZhangJZhangY. Plate related complication after mandibular reconstruction. Zhonghua Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi. 2012;48(10):586–590.
18.
ChungJ-HYoonE-SParkS-HLeeB-IKimH-SYouH-J. Comparison of mechanical stability between fibular free flap reconstruction versus locking mandibular reconstruction plate fixation. Arch Craniofac Surg. 2014;15(2):75–81.
19.
BrunnerHSimpsonJP. Fatigue fracture of bone plates. Injury. 1980;11(3):203–207.
20.
MartolaMLindqvistCHänninenHAl-SukhunJ. Fracture of titanium plates used for mandibular reconstruction following ablative tumor surgery. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater. 2007;80(2):345–352.
21.
WildeFCorneliusC-PSchrammA. Computer-assisted mandibular reconstruction using a patient-specific reconstruction plate fabricated with computer-aided design and manufacturing techniques. Craniomaxillofac Trauma Reconstr. 2014;7(2):158–166.
22.
WildeFHankenHProbstFSchrammAHeilandMCorneliusC-P. Multicenter study on the use of patient-specific CAD/CAM reconstruction plates for mandibular reconstruction. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg. 2015;10(12):2035–2051.
23.
MaschaFWinterKPietzkaSHeufelderMSchrammAWildeF. Accuracy of computer-assisted mandibular reconstructions using patient-specific implants in combination with CAD/CAM fabricated transfer keys. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2017;45(11):1884–1897.
24.
Sieira GilRRoigAMObispoCAMorlaAPagèsCMPerezJL. Surgical planning and microvascular reconstruction of the mandible with a fibular flap using computer-aided design, rapid prototype modelling, and precontoured titanium reconstruction plates: a prospective study. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2015;53(1):49–53.
25.
ShibaharaTNomaHFuruyaYTakakiR. Fracture of mandibular reconstruction plates used after tumor resection. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2002;60(2):182–185.
26.
KatakuraAShibaharaTNomaHYoshinariM. Material analysis of AO plate fracture cases. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2004;62(3):348–352.
27.
EttlTDriemelODrespBVReichertTEReutherJPistnerH. Feasibility of alloplastic mandibular reconstruction in patients following removal of oral squamous cell carcinoma. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2010;38(5):350–354.
28.
MarkwardtJPfeiferGEckeltUReitemeierB. Analysis of complications after reconstruction of bone defects involving complete mandibular resection using finite element modelling. Onkologie. 2007;30(3):121–126.
29.
RendenbachCSellenschlohKGerbigL, et al.CAD-CAM plates versus conventional fixation plates for primary mandibular reconstruction: a biomechanical in vitro analysis. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2017;45(11):1878–1883.
30.
KoolstraJH. Dynamics of the human masticatory system. Crit Rev Oral Biol Med. 2002;13(4):366–376.
31.
van EijdenTM. Biomechanics of the mandible. Crit Rev Oral Biol Med. 2000;11(1):123–136.
32.
AtkinsonHFShepherdRW. The masticatory movements of patients after major oral surgery. J Prosthet Dent. 1969;21(1):86–91.
33.
CantorRCurtisTA. Prosthetic management of edentulous mandibulectomy patients. I. Anatomic, physiologic, and psychologic considerations. J Prosthet Dent. 1971;25(4):446–457.
34.
SchaafNG. Oral reconstruction for edentulous patients after partial mandibulectomies. J Prosthet Dent. 1976;36(3):292–297.
35.
HelkimoECarlssonGEHelkimoM. Bite force and state of dentition. Acta Odontol Scand. 1977;35(6):297–303.
36.
SonnenburgMFethkeKRiedelSVoelkerH. Zur Belastung der Zähne des menschlichen Kiefers. Zahn Mund Kieferheilkd Zentralbl. 1978;66(2):125–132.
37.
GibbsCHMahanPELundeenHCBrehnanKWalshEKHolbrookWB. Occlusal forces during chewing and swallowing as measured by sound transmission. J Prosthet Dent. 1981;46(4):443–449.
38.
ProffitWFieldsHNixonW. Occlusal forces in normal- and long-face adults. J Dent Res. 1983;62(5):566–570.
39.
GibbsCHMahanPEMauderliALundeenHCWalshEK. Limits of human bite strength. J Prosthet Dent. 1986;56(2):226–229.
40.
KampeTHaraldsonTHannerzHCarlssonGE. Occlusal perception and bite force in young subjects with and without dental fillings. Acta Odontol Scand. 1987;45(2):101–107.
41.
LauerH-ChOttlPFickerEWeiglP. Kaukraftmessung an unterschiedlich verankerten Teilprothesen. Dtsch Zahnaerztl Z. 1992;47:482–485.
42.
HaradaKWatanabeMOhkuraKEnomotoS. Measure of bite force and occlusal contact area before and after bilateral sagittal split ramus osteotomy of the mandible using a new pressure-sensitive device: a preliminary report. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2000;58(4):370–374.
43.
MaurerPPistnerHSchubertJ. Computer assisted chewing power in patients with segmental resection of the mandible. Mund Kiefer Gesichtschir. 2006;10(1):37–41.
44.
TelschowTWildeFPietzkaASchrammAMaschaF. Unbreakable?—Frakturen patientenspezifischer Implantate nach alloplastischer Unterkieferrekonstruktion. Der MKG-Chirurg. 2019;12:263–267.
45.
GutwaldRJaegerRLambersFM. Customized mandibular reconstruction plates improve mechanical performance in a mandibular reconstruction model. Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Engin. 2017;20(4):426–435.
46.
BujtárPSimonovicsJVáradiKBSándorGKBAveryCME. The biomechanical aspects of reconstruction for segmental defects of the mandible: a finite element study to assess the optimization of plate and screw factors. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2014;42(6):855–862.
47.
GatenoJCookstonCHsuSS, et al.Biomechanical evaluation of a new MatrixMandible plating system on cadaver mandibles. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2013;71(11):1900–1914.
48.
ZimmerUSA. Physical and Mechanical Properties of Orthopaedic Alloys. Zimmer Technical Monograph. Elsevier; 1984.
49.
ZerbstUHilgenbergK. Schadensentwicklung und Schadenstoleranz von SLM-gefertigten Strukturen. In: RichardHSchrammBZipsnerT, eds. Additive Fertigung von Bauteilen und Strukturen. Springer Vieweg; 2017:242.
50.
HaugRHFattahiTTGoltzM. A biomechanical evaluation of mandibular angle fracture plating techniques. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2001;59(10):1199–1210.
51.
DotyJMPienkowskiDGoltzMHaugRHValentinoJArosarenaOA. Biomechanical evaluation of fixation techniques for bridging segmental mandibular defects. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2004;130(12):1388–1392.
