medigraphic.com
ISSN 2007-3178 (Print)
Asociación Mexicana de Cirugía Bucal y Maxilofacial, Colegio Mexicano de Cirugía Bucal y Maxilofacial, A.C.

2010, Number 3

<< Back Next >>

Rev Mex Cir Bucal Maxilofac 2010; 6 (3)

Mandibular reconstruction with prosthesis hemimandibular of titanium and HTR with total replacement of polyethylene ATM of individualized design by a tumor resection sequelae

Miranda VE, Rivera ET, Delgado GP

Language: Spanish
References: 21
Page: 100-105
PDF size: 303.53 Kb.


ABSTRACT

The maxillofacial osseous tumors of an aggressive nature represent a challenge for the surgeon because they require a radical management based on wide resection generating devastating skeletal defects. Complex of reconstructive surgery aims to restore the protective function and provide aesthetically acceptable results. The implant HTR (hard tissue replacement) together with titanium 5 grade type are individually designed to match the patient osseous structure based on biomodels, has shown an acceptable integration of hard and soft tissues as well as provide a simplified option for craniofacial reconstruction. This is a report of a tumor resection sequelae of a mandibular myxoma which has undergone to multiple failed reconstructions, restored with an patients matched prosthesis of an titanium hemimandibular with a total temporomandibular joint replacement and a HTR implant of body and ramus.


REFERENCES

  1. Ashman A et al. The introduction and history of HTR Polymer, Department of Biomaterials, College of Dentistry, New York University, New York. New York, 1987.

  2. Eppley BL, Sadove AM, German RZ. Evaluation of HTR polymer as a craniomaxillofacial graft material. Plast Reconst Surg 1990; 86 (6): 1085-1092.

  3. Binderman I et al. Grafts of HTR polymer versus Keil bone in experimental long bone defects in rats. In Lemons J (Ed): Special Technical Publication No. 953. Philadelphia. American Society for Testing and Materials, 1987.

  4. Raghavan V. Al-Ti-V (Aluminium-Titanium-Vanadium) J of phase equilibrium and diffusion 2007; 26: 276-279.

  5. Johnson EE. Custom titanium plating for failed nonunion or delayed internal fixation of femoral fractures. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1988; 234: 195-203.

  6. Levine DL. The effect of material stiffness on the function of cemented tibial trays: Ti-6A1-4V vs Co-Cr Alloy. Technical Monograph 97-2100-05. Warsaw, In. Zimmer, 1995.

  7. Kurtz SM. The UHMWPE Handbook, Academic Press, New York, 2004. isbn: 0124298516.

  8. Overview and fundamentals of UHMWPE: Fact on UHMWPE. Howmedica, Technical Monograph 6092-0-009. Rutherford, NJ, 1994.

  9. Li S, Burstein AH. Ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene: The material and its use in total joint implants. J Bone Joint Surg Am 76A 1994: 1080-1090.

  10. Quinn Peter, Lorenz Prosthesis, Total temporomandibular joint reconstruction Oral and Maxillofacial surgery clinics of North America Volume 12 Number 1 Feb 2000: 93.

  11. Biomet, Inc. PMI Brochure. Jacksonville, FL, 1994.

  12. Eppley BL. Producing a full-scale model from computed tomography data with the rapid prototyping technique using the bonder jet method – a comparison with the laser lithography method using a dry skull (Discussant) J Craniofac Surg (in press).

  13. Miranda V. Abordaje retroauricular en forma de «E» para la articulación temporomandibular. Revista de especialidades Medico-Quirúrgicas 2006; 11 (2): 72-75.

  14. Freeman BS, Wimer DR. Clinical use of proplast: Expectations and results. In Rubin LR, ed. Biomaterials in Reconstructive Surgery. St. Louis. MO: CV Mosby; 1983: 494.

  15. Eppley BL, Kilgo M, Coleman III, JJ. Craniofacial reconstruction with computer generated patient-matched HTR implants. Plast Reconstr Surg (2002).

  16. Binderman I, Horowitz I et al. Comparison of bone grafting materials in experimental long bone gaps in rats. Ichilov Medical Center. Israel, 1992.

  17. Eppley BL, Kilgo M, Coleman JJ. Cranial reconstruction with computer generated hard-tissue replacement patient-matched implants: Indications, Surgical Technique, and Long-Term Follow-up. Plastic Reconstructive Surgery 2002: 109: 864.

  18. Eppley BL, Sadove AM, German RZ. Evaluation of HTR polymer as a craniomaxillofacial graft material. Plast Reconst Surg 1990; 86 (6): 1085-1092.

  19. Eppley B. Craniofacial reconstruction with computer-generated HTR patient-matched implants: use in primary bony tumor excision. Journal of Craniofacial Surgery 2002; 13 (5): 650-657.

  20. D’Urso PS, Baker TM, Earwaker WJ et al. Stereolithografic biomodeling in cranio-maxillofacial surgery: a prospective trial. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 1999: 27-30.

  21. Hoffmann J, Cornelius CP, Groten M et al. Orbital reconstruction with individually copy-milled ceramic implants. Plast Reconstr Surg 1988: 81-315.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com