Moreno CJE, Medina FCE, Alfonso MFG

Language: Spanish
References: 12
Page: 108-112
PDF size: 327.36 Kb.

ABSTRACT

After the description and implementation of the free fibula flap for mandibular reconstruction, it has become the gold standard for this procedure, having great progress regarding the flaps own modifications and its implementation to accomplish better aesthetic and functional results; however, it requires a great surgical effort in its usual preparation. As of the 90's, the use of stereolithographic models taken from tomographic reports was implemented for presurgical planning, achieving a significant improvement in postoperative results. The objective of this article is to present the case of a patient with unicystic ameloblastoma, who underwent tumor resection and reconstruction in one surgical time using a free fibula flap with microanastomosis of the facial vein and artery. The osteotomies were planned using three-dimensional anatomical models. When performing the fibula osteotomies, a previously folded system 2.0 anatomical plate was used, according to the printed anatomical models. There were no complications during the procedure nor in the postoperative period; the patient had an adequate evolution, with a six-month follow-up after the surgery. We consider that, despite the poor accessibility of virtual planning, it is a useful tool with multiple aesthetic and functional benefits, in which more studies focused on the profitability of this procedure are needed.

REFERENCES

1. Wei FC. Flaps and reconstructive surgery 2nd edition. Edimburgo: Elsevier 2017.

2. Hidalgo DA. Fibula free flap: a new method of mandible reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg 1989; 84: 71-9.

3. Ritschl LM, Mücke T, Hart D et al. Retrospective analysis of complications in 190 mandibular resections and simultaneous reconstructions with free fibula flap, iliac crest flap or reconstruction plate: a comparative single centre study. Clin Oral Invest 2021; 25: 2905-2914. Available in: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-020-03607-8

4. Taylor GI, Miller GD, Ham FJ. The free vascularized bone graft: a clinical extension of microvascular techniques. Plast Reconstr Surg 1975; 55: 533-544.

5. Shroff SS, Nair SC, Shah A, Kumar B. Versatility of fibula free flap in reconstruction of facial defects: a center study. J Maxillofac Oral Surg 2017; 16 (1): 101-107. doi: 10.1007/s12663-016-0930-6.

6. Kokosis G, Schmitz R, Powers DB, Erdmann D. Mandibular reconstruction using the free vascularized fibula graft: an overview of different modifications. Arch Plast Surg 2016; 43 (1): 3-9. Available in: doi.org/10.5999/aps.2016.43.1.3

7. Avraham T, Franco P, Brecht LE, Ceradini DJ, Saadeh PB, Hirsch DL, Levine JP. Functional outcomes of virtually planned free fibula flap reconstruction of the mandible. Plast Reconstr Surg 2014; 134 (4): 628e-634e. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000000513.

8. Seruya M, Fisher M, Rodriguez ED. Computer-assisted versus conventional free fibula flap technique for craniofacial reconstruction: an outcomes comparison. Plast Reconstr Surg 2013; 132 (5): 1219-1228. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e3182a3c0b1.

9. Schultz BD, Sosin M, Nam A, Mohan R, Zhang P, Khalifian S et al. Classification of mandible defects and algorithm for microvascular reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg 2015; 135 (4): 743e-754e. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000001106.

10. Gupta N, Saxena S, Rathod VC, Aggarwal P. Unicystic ameloblastoma of the mandible. J Oral Maxillofac Pathol 2011; 15 (2): 228-231. doi: 10.4103/0973-029X.84511.

11. May MM, Howe BM, O'Byrne TJ, Alexander AE, Morris JM, Moore EJ, et al. Short and long-term outcomes of three-dimensional printed surgical guides and virtual surgical planning versus conventional methods for fibula free flap reconstruction of the mandible: Decreased nonunion and complication rates. Head Neck 2021; 43 (8): 2342-2352. doi: 10.1002/hed.26688.

12. Fatima A, Hackman TG, Wood JS. Cost-effectiveness analysis of virtual surgical planning in mandibular reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg 2019; 143 (4): 1185-1194.