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

2014, Number 2

<< Back Next >>

Rev Mex Cir Bucal Maxilofac 2014; 10 (2)

Effectiveness of the stereolithographic model in predictive craniomaxillofacial surgery at the «General Ignacio Zaragoza» Regional Hospital ISSSTE. Research Report

Miranda VJE, Barajas PH, Miranda CE

Language: Spanish
References: 21
Page: 57-64
PDF size: 170.62 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Preoperative planning in stereolithographic models has many benefits concerning an accurate diagnosis, a good prognosis, and a precise surgical plan for the patient. It is a useful tool for tumor, reconstructive and craniofacial surgery, ideal for the study of anteroposterior, transverse and vertical craniofacial relationships, giving the surgeon a comprehensive three-dimensional perspective of bone discrepancies. It allows the surgeon to visualize and use three-dimensional models to make a surgical predictive plan with a 95% accuracy, making possible to bend and contour the fixation plates with high efficiency before the surgical act. A surgical and field research protocol was conducted in patients with bone abnormalities at the Hospital Regional «General Ignacio Zaragoza», Instituto de Seguridad y Servicios Sociales para los Trabajadores del Estado, in Mexico City. As part of the diagnosis, a stereolithography was made, which are indicted in severe problems that need high precision to perform a surgical simulation. The study was made from January 2007 to May 2013, using a sample of 60 patients. Each one was classified by the head surgeon and his team in four groups, according to their diagnosis. In every case more than one technique was applied, reaching the objectives of surgical skills development, selection and adaptation of the osteosynthesis material and evaluation of the benefits, safety and limitations of each procedure.


REFERENCES

  1. Brown GA, Milner B, Firoozbakhsh K. Application of computer-generated stereolithography and interpositioning template in acetabular fractures: a case report of eight cases. J Orthop Trauma. 2002; 16 (5): 347-352.

  2. De Zelicourt D, Pekkan K, Kitajima H, Fraker D, Yoganathan AP. Single step stereolitography of complex anatomical models for optical flow measurements. J Biomech Eng. 2005; 127 (1): 204-207.

  3. D’Urso PS, Earwaker WJ, Barker TM, Redmond MJ, Thompson RG, Effeney DJ et al. Custom cranioplasty using stereolithography and acrylic. J Craniol Surg. 2003; 14 (86): 819-832.

  4. Edward RC, Kiely KD, Eppley BL. Fixation of bimaxilary osteotomy with reabsorbable plates and screwsm experience of 20 consecutive cases. J Oral Maxillofacial Surg. 2001; 59: 271-276.

  5. Ghali GE, Sikes JW. Intraoral vertical ramus osteotomy as the preferend treatment for mandibular prognathism. J Oral Maxillofacial Surg. 2000; 58: 313-315.

  6. Hill JS, Reuther JF. Rapad prototyping in planning reconstructive surgery of the head and neck. Review and evaluation of indicactions in clinical use. Mund Kiefer Gesichtschir. 2004; 8 (3): 135-153.

  7. Stoner DL, Watson SM, Stedfeld RD, Meakin P, Griffel LK, Tyler TL et al. Application of estereolithography custom models for study the impact of biofilms and mineral precipitation of fluid flow. Appl Envirom Microbiol. 2005; 71 (12): 8721-8728.

  8. Jiménez-Castillo R, Benavides-Ríos A. La estereolitografía en la Facultad de Odontología de la UNAM. Revista Odontológica Mexicana. 2005; 9 (1): 48-50.

  9. Takeda MW, Kirihara S, Miyamoto Y, Sakoda K, Honda K. Localization of electromagnetic waves in three dimensional fractal cavities. Phys Rec Lett. 2004; 92 (9): 093902.

  10. Nojdehi M, Buschang PH, English JD, Wolford LM. Postsurgical growth changes in the mandible of adolescents with vertical surgery maxillary excess growth pattern. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2001; 119: 106-116.

  11. Molina F. Avances en distracción ósea creaneofacial. I Simposium internacional sobre deformidades faciales congénitas y 2a reunión de la Sociedad Española de Fisuras faciales. La Coruña. 2002.

  12. Perez-Arjona E, Dojovny M, Park H, Kulyanov D, Galaniuk A, Agner C et al. Stereolithography neurosurgical and medical implications. Neurol Res. 2003; 25 (3): 227-236.

  13. Posnick JC, Ruiz RL. Treacher Collins syndrome; current evaluation, treatment and future directions. Cleft Palate Craneofacial J. 2000; 37 (5): [483]1-22.

  14. Turner RC. An overview of stereolitography (STL). J Biocommun. 2003; 29 (4): 3-4.

  15. Yacubian A, Laronga PR, Coelho RA, Ducati LG, Silva MV. Prototipagem as an alternativa para realizaçao de cranioplastia com metilmetacrilato: nota tecnica. Arq Neuro-Psiquiatr. 2004; 63 (3): 1-7.

  16. Wurm G, Tomancok B, Holl K, Trenkler J. Prospective study on cranioplasty with individual carbon fiber reinforce polymer (CFRP) implants produced by means of stereolithography. Surg Neurol. 2004; 628 (6): 510-521.

  17. Weber W. A modified mandibular ramus osteotomy for orthognatic surgery. J Oral Maxillofacial Surg. 2001; 59: 237-240.

  18. Wolfor LM, Karras SC, Mehra P. Consideration for orthognathic surgery during growth, part 1: mandibular deformities. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Ortohop. 2001; 119: 95-101.

  19. Wolfor LM, Karras SC, Mehra P. Consideration for orthognathic surgery during growth, part 2: mandibular deformities. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Ortohop. 2001; 119: 102-105.

  20. Wolfor LM, Karras SC, Mehra P. The sagittal split ramus osteotomy as the preferred treatment for mandibular prognathism. J Oral Maxillofacial Surg. 2000; 53: 310-312.

  21. Yamada K, Hanada K. Condylar bony change, disk displacement and signs and symptoms of TMJ disorders in orthognathic surgery patients. Oral Surg Oral Pahol Oral Radiol Endod. 2001; 91: 603-610.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com