Cargando…

Osseous Union after Mandible Reconstruction with Fibula Free Flap Using Manually Bent Plates vs. Patient-Specific Implants: A Retrospective Analysis of 89 Patients

The aim of this monocentric, retrospective clinical study was to evaluate the status of osseous union in uni- and poly-segmental mandible reconstructions regarding conventional angle-stable manually bent osteosynthesis plates (Unilock 2.0 mm) versus titan laser-melted PSI patient-specific implant’s...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Knitschke, Michael, Sonnabend, Sophia, Roller, Fritz Christian, Pons-Kühnemann, Jörn, Schmermund, Daniel, Attia, Sameh, Streckbein, Philipp, Howaldt, Hans-Peter, Böttger, Sebastian
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9139377/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35621664
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/curroncol29050274
_version_ 1784714845437820928
author Knitschke, Michael
Sonnabend, Sophia
Roller, Fritz Christian
Pons-Kühnemann, Jörn
Schmermund, Daniel
Attia, Sameh
Streckbein, Philipp
Howaldt, Hans-Peter
Böttger, Sebastian
author_facet Knitschke, Michael
Sonnabend, Sophia
Roller, Fritz Christian
Pons-Kühnemann, Jörn
Schmermund, Daniel
Attia, Sameh
Streckbein, Philipp
Howaldt, Hans-Peter
Böttger, Sebastian
author_sort Knitschke, Michael
collection PubMed
description The aim of this monocentric, retrospective clinical study was to evaluate the status of osseous union in uni- and poly-segmental mandible reconstructions regarding conventional angle-stable manually bent osteosynthesis plates (Unilock 2.0 mm) versus titan laser-melted PSI patient-specific implant’s (PSI). The clinical impact of PSI’s high stiffness fixation methods on bone healing and regeneration is still not well addressed. The special interest was in evaluating the ossification of junctions between mandible and fibula and between osteotomized fibula free flap (FFF) segments. Panoramic radiograph (OPT), computed tomography (CT) scans, or cone-beam CTs (CBCT) of patients who underwent successful FFF for mandible reconstruction from January 2005 to December 2020 were analyzed. A total number of 89 cases (28 females (31.5%), 61 males (68.5%), mean age 58.2 ± 11.3 years, range: 22.8–82.7 years) fulfilled the chosen inclusion criteria for analysis (conventional: n = 44 vs. PSI: n = 45). The present study found an overall incomplete ossification (IOU) rate of 24.7% (conventional: 13.6% vs. PSI: 35.6%; p = 0.017) for mandible to fibula and intersegmental junctions. Between osteotomized FFF segments, an IOU rate of 16% was found in the PSI-group, while no IOU was recorded in the conventional group (p = 0.015). Significant differences were registered for IOU rates in poly-segmental (p = 0.041), and lateral (p = 0.016) mandibular reconstructions when PSI was used. Multivariate logistic regression analysis identified plate exposure and type of plate used as independent risk factors for IOU. Previous or adjuvant radiotherapy did not impact incomplete osseous union in the evaluated study sample. PSI is more rigid than bent mini-plates and shields functional mechanical stimuli, and is the main reason for increasing the rate of incomplete ossification. To enhance the functional stimulus for ossification it has to be discussed if patient-specific implants can be designed to be thinner, and should be divided into segmental plates. This directs chewing forces through the bone and improves physiological bone remodeling.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9139377
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-91393772022-05-28 Osseous Union after Mandible Reconstruction with Fibula Free Flap Using Manually Bent Plates vs. Patient-Specific Implants: A Retrospective Analysis of 89 Patients Knitschke, Michael Sonnabend, Sophia Roller, Fritz Christian Pons-Kühnemann, Jörn Schmermund, Daniel Attia, Sameh Streckbein, Philipp Howaldt, Hans-Peter Böttger, Sebastian Curr Oncol Article The aim of this monocentric, retrospective clinical study was to evaluate the status of osseous union in uni- and poly-segmental mandible reconstructions regarding conventional angle-stable manually bent osteosynthesis plates (Unilock 2.0 mm) versus titan laser-melted PSI patient-specific implant’s (PSI). The clinical impact of PSI’s high stiffness fixation methods on bone healing and regeneration is still not well addressed. The special interest was in evaluating the ossification of junctions between mandible and fibula and between osteotomized fibula free flap (FFF) segments. Panoramic radiograph (OPT), computed tomography (CT) scans, or cone-beam CTs (CBCT) of patients who underwent successful FFF for mandible reconstruction from January 2005 to December 2020 were analyzed. A total number of 89 cases (28 females (31.5%), 61 males (68.5%), mean age 58.2 ± 11.3 years, range: 22.8–82.7 years) fulfilled the chosen inclusion criteria for analysis (conventional: n = 44 vs. PSI: n = 45). The present study found an overall incomplete ossification (IOU) rate of 24.7% (conventional: 13.6% vs. PSI: 35.6%; p = 0.017) for mandible to fibula and intersegmental junctions. Between osteotomized FFF segments, an IOU rate of 16% was found in the PSI-group, while no IOU was recorded in the conventional group (p = 0.015). Significant differences were registered for IOU rates in poly-segmental (p = 0.041), and lateral (p = 0.016) mandibular reconstructions when PSI was used. Multivariate logistic regression analysis identified plate exposure and type of plate used as independent risk factors for IOU. Previous or adjuvant radiotherapy did not impact incomplete osseous union in the evaluated study sample. PSI is more rigid than bent mini-plates and shields functional mechanical stimuli, and is the main reason for increasing the rate of incomplete ossification. To enhance the functional stimulus for ossification it has to be discussed if patient-specific implants can be designed to be thinner, and should be divided into segmental plates. This directs chewing forces through the bone and improves physiological bone remodeling. MDPI 2022-05-06 /pmc/articles/PMC9139377/ /pubmed/35621664 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/curroncol29050274 Text en © 2022 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Knitschke, Michael
Sonnabend, Sophia
Roller, Fritz Christian
Pons-Kühnemann, Jörn
Schmermund, Daniel
Attia, Sameh
Streckbein, Philipp
Howaldt, Hans-Peter
Böttger, Sebastian
Osseous Union after Mandible Reconstruction with Fibula Free Flap Using Manually Bent Plates vs. Patient-Specific Implants: A Retrospective Analysis of 89 Patients
title Osseous Union after Mandible Reconstruction with Fibula Free Flap Using Manually Bent Plates vs. Patient-Specific Implants: A Retrospective Analysis of 89 Patients
title_full Osseous Union after Mandible Reconstruction with Fibula Free Flap Using Manually Bent Plates vs. Patient-Specific Implants: A Retrospective Analysis of 89 Patients
title_fullStr Osseous Union after Mandible Reconstruction with Fibula Free Flap Using Manually Bent Plates vs. Patient-Specific Implants: A Retrospective Analysis of 89 Patients
title_full_unstemmed Osseous Union after Mandible Reconstruction with Fibula Free Flap Using Manually Bent Plates vs. Patient-Specific Implants: A Retrospective Analysis of 89 Patients
title_short Osseous Union after Mandible Reconstruction with Fibula Free Flap Using Manually Bent Plates vs. Patient-Specific Implants: A Retrospective Analysis of 89 Patients
title_sort osseous union after mandible reconstruction with fibula free flap using manually bent plates vs. patient-specific implants: a retrospective analysis of 89 patients
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9139377/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35621664
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/curroncol29050274
work_keys_str_mv AT knitschkemichael osseousunionaftermandiblereconstructionwithfibulafreeflapusingmanuallybentplatesvspatientspecificimplantsaretrospectiveanalysisof89patients
AT sonnabendsophia osseousunionaftermandiblereconstructionwithfibulafreeflapusingmanuallybentplatesvspatientspecificimplantsaretrospectiveanalysisof89patients
AT rollerfritzchristian osseousunionaftermandiblereconstructionwithfibulafreeflapusingmanuallybentplatesvspatientspecificimplantsaretrospectiveanalysisof89patients
AT ponskuhnemannjorn osseousunionaftermandiblereconstructionwithfibulafreeflapusingmanuallybentplatesvspatientspecificimplantsaretrospectiveanalysisof89patients
AT schmermunddaniel osseousunionaftermandiblereconstructionwithfibulafreeflapusingmanuallybentplatesvspatientspecificimplantsaretrospectiveanalysisof89patients
AT attiasameh osseousunionaftermandiblereconstructionwithfibulafreeflapusingmanuallybentplatesvspatientspecificimplantsaretrospectiveanalysisof89patients
AT streckbeinphilipp osseousunionaftermandiblereconstructionwithfibulafreeflapusingmanuallybentplatesvspatientspecificimplantsaretrospectiveanalysisof89patients
AT howaldthanspeter osseousunionaftermandiblereconstructionwithfibulafreeflapusingmanuallybentplatesvspatientspecificimplantsaretrospectiveanalysisof89patients
AT bottgersebastian osseousunionaftermandiblereconstructionwithfibulafreeflapusingmanuallybentplatesvspatientspecificimplantsaretrospectiveanalysisof89patients