Cargando…

Metallic Fixation of Mandibular Segmental Defects: Graft Immobilization and Orofacial Functional Maintenance

The aim of this study is to investigate the behavior of the healthy mandible under maximum molar bite force to demonstrate the problems associated with the current standard of care procedures for mandibular segmental defect reconstruction (ie, use of Ti–6Al–4V hardware and either a single- or double...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Shayesteh Moghaddam, Narges, Jahadakbar, Ahmadreza, Amerinatanzi, Amirhesam, Elahinia, Mohammad, Miller, Michael, Dean, David
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Wolters Kluwer Health 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5054989/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27757323
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/GOX.0000000000000859
_version_ 1782458701925318656
author Shayesteh Moghaddam, Narges
Jahadakbar, Ahmadreza
Amerinatanzi, Amirhesam
Elahinia, Mohammad
Miller, Michael
Dean, David
author_facet Shayesteh Moghaddam, Narges
Jahadakbar, Ahmadreza
Amerinatanzi, Amirhesam
Elahinia, Mohammad
Miller, Michael
Dean, David
author_sort Shayesteh Moghaddam, Narges
collection PubMed
description The aim of this study is to investigate the behavior of the healthy mandible under maximum molar bite force to demonstrate the problems associated with the current standard of care procedures for mandibular segmental defect reconstruction (ie, use of Ti–6Al–4V hardware and either a single- or double-barrel fibular graft). With current Ti–6Al–4V mandibular reconstruction hardware, there is a significant stiffness mismatch among the hardware, graft, and the remaining host anatomy. How the distribution of mechanical forces through the mandible is altered after a segmental bone loss and reconstruction is incompletely understood. METHODS: We studied a healthy adult mandible for stress, strain, and reaction force distribution during normal mastication. Stress distribution of this model was then used to study problems encountered after mandibular segmental defect reconstructive surgery. We model the use of both single- and double-barrel fibular grafts to repair the loss of the left M(1)–(3) containing segment of the mandible. These simulations were done using 2 sets of plates with different thicknesses. RESULTS: We found that the stiffness mismatching between the fixation hardware and the graft and host bone causes stress shielding of that bone and stress concentrations in the fixation hardware and screws. These effects are expected, especially during the bone healing period. However, long term, this abnormal stress–strain distribution may lead to either the hardware’s failure due to stress concentration or graft failure due to bone resorption as a result of stress shielding. We found that the stress–strain distribution is more normal with a double-barrel fibular graft. Additionally, we found that thinner fixation plates can reduce stress shielding. CONCLUSION: The proposed model can be used to evaluate the performance and optimization of the fixation device.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5054989
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Wolters Kluwer Health
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-50549892016-10-18 Metallic Fixation of Mandibular Segmental Defects: Graft Immobilization and Orofacial Functional Maintenance Shayesteh Moghaddam, Narges Jahadakbar, Ahmadreza Amerinatanzi, Amirhesam Elahinia, Mohammad Miller, Michael Dean, David Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open Original Article The aim of this study is to investigate the behavior of the healthy mandible under maximum molar bite force to demonstrate the problems associated with the current standard of care procedures for mandibular segmental defect reconstruction (ie, use of Ti–6Al–4V hardware and either a single- or double-barrel fibular graft). With current Ti–6Al–4V mandibular reconstruction hardware, there is a significant stiffness mismatch among the hardware, graft, and the remaining host anatomy. How the distribution of mechanical forces through the mandible is altered after a segmental bone loss and reconstruction is incompletely understood. METHODS: We studied a healthy adult mandible for stress, strain, and reaction force distribution during normal mastication. Stress distribution of this model was then used to study problems encountered after mandibular segmental defect reconstructive surgery. We model the use of both single- and double-barrel fibular grafts to repair the loss of the left M(1)–(3) containing segment of the mandible. These simulations were done using 2 sets of plates with different thicknesses. RESULTS: We found that the stiffness mismatching between the fixation hardware and the graft and host bone causes stress shielding of that bone and stress concentrations in the fixation hardware and screws. These effects are expected, especially during the bone healing period. However, long term, this abnormal stress–strain distribution may lead to either the hardware’s failure due to stress concentration or graft failure due to bone resorption as a result of stress shielding. We found that the stress–strain distribution is more normal with a double-barrel fibular graft. Additionally, we found that thinner fixation plates can reduce stress shielding. CONCLUSION: The proposed model can be used to evaluate the performance and optimization of the fixation device. Wolters Kluwer Health 2016-09-08 /pmc/articles/PMC5054989/ /pubmed/27757323 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/GOX.0000000000000859 Text en Copyright © 2016 The Authors. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of The American Society of Plastic Surgeons. All rights reserved. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives License 4.0 (CCBY-NC-ND) (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) , where it is permissible to download and share the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be changed in any way or used commercially.
spellingShingle Original Article
Shayesteh Moghaddam, Narges
Jahadakbar, Ahmadreza
Amerinatanzi, Amirhesam
Elahinia, Mohammad
Miller, Michael
Dean, David
Metallic Fixation of Mandibular Segmental Defects: Graft Immobilization and Orofacial Functional Maintenance
title Metallic Fixation of Mandibular Segmental Defects: Graft Immobilization and Orofacial Functional Maintenance
title_full Metallic Fixation of Mandibular Segmental Defects: Graft Immobilization and Orofacial Functional Maintenance
title_fullStr Metallic Fixation of Mandibular Segmental Defects: Graft Immobilization and Orofacial Functional Maintenance
title_full_unstemmed Metallic Fixation of Mandibular Segmental Defects: Graft Immobilization and Orofacial Functional Maintenance
title_short Metallic Fixation of Mandibular Segmental Defects: Graft Immobilization and Orofacial Functional Maintenance
title_sort metallic fixation of mandibular segmental defects: graft immobilization and orofacial functional maintenance
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5054989/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27757323
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/GOX.0000000000000859
work_keys_str_mv AT shayestehmoghaddamnarges metallicfixationofmandibularsegmentaldefectsgraftimmobilizationandorofacialfunctionalmaintenance
AT jahadakbarahmadreza metallicfixationofmandibularsegmentaldefectsgraftimmobilizationandorofacialfunctionalmaintenance
AT amerinatanziamirhesam metallicfixationofmandibularsegmentaldefectsgraftimmobilizationandorofacialfunctionalmaintenance
AT elahiniamohammad metallicfixationofmandibularsegmentaldefectsgraftimmobilizationandorofacialfunctionalmaintenance
AT millermichael metallicfixationofmandibularsegmentaldefectsgraftimmobilizationandorofacialfunctionalmaintenance
AT deandavid metallicfixationofmandibularsegmentaldefectsgraftimmobilizationandorofacialfunctionalmaintenance