World Journal of Dentistry

Register      Login

VOLUME 15 , ISSUE 2 ( February, 2024 ) > List of Articles


Stereo lithography and Patient-specific Implants in Reconstruction of Craniofacial Defects: Institutional Experience

Sandeep Kalarickal Madhu, KS R Nair, Johnson Akkarapatty George, Midhun Sai, Shahina Karimbana Thottathil, Arun Thankamony Jayanthi

Keywords : Case report, Craniofacial defects, Patient-specific implants, Posttrauma defect, Stereolithography

Citation Information : Madhu SK, Nair KR, George JA, Sai M, Thottathil SK, Jayanthi AT. Stereo lithography and Patient-specific Implants in Reconstruction of Craniofacial Defects: Institutional Experience. World J Dent 2024; 15 (2):168-173.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10015-2372

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 02-04-2024

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2024; The Author(s).


Aim: To replicate the stereolithography (STL) method to reconstruct the craniofacial skeleton with titanium implants through conventional surgical site approaches, thereby assessing the intraoperative efficacy in terms of time management, accuracy in fixation, restoration of geometry, and postoperative outcome in terms of stability of implants, function, esthetics, and patient satisfaction. Background: Conventional methods of reconstruction of the maxillofacial region with autografts or flaps might not yield the best results in the form of function esthetics and offer donor site morbidity and necrosis of the recipient site, but with the advent of STL restores the geometry of craniofacial skeleton with less operative time and risk for surgeons and postoperative complications. Case description: This paper reports a series of three cases that had major craniofacial defects post cranioplasty, reconstructed with patient-specific titanium implants by stereo lithographic method, and one case of mandibular reconstruction with free fibula flap postresection for ameloblastoma guided by STL, with a minimum follow-up period of 4 years and observed satisfactory results in terms of function and esthetics. Conclusion: Stereolithography (STL)-guided implants have the potential to replace conventional bone grafting and restore a patient's esthetics, function, and quality of life by offering no donor site morbidity, aiding presurgical planning, performing mock surgeries, and reconstruction of defects with precision. Clinical significance: Stereolithography (STL) technology alleviates the use of bone grafts and flaps for reconstruction of craniomaxillofacial defects and aids in the best esthetic and functional outcome, no donor site morbidity, and is easier for the surgeons.

PDF Share
  1. Sinn DP, Cillo JE Jr, Miles BA. Stereolithography for craniofacial surgery. J Craniofac Surg 2006;17(5):869–875. DOI: 10.1097/01.scs.0000230618.95012.1d
  2. Ansari FM, Sanaka SR, Anand R, et al. Role of stereolithography in orthognathic surgery. J Adv Med Dent Sci Res 2020;8(9):57–59. DOI: 10.21276/jamdsr
  3. Liu F, Tang K, Zheng PF, et al. Performance of Tönnis triple osteotomy in older children with developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH) assisted by a 3D printing navigation template. BMC Muscul Disord 2022;23(1):712. DOI: 10.1186/s12891-022-05669-z
  4. Baudoin ME, Palines PA, Stalder MW. Frontal cranioplasty with vascularized split-iliac crest bone flap. Plast Reconstruct Surg Global Open 2021;9(11):e3934. DOI: 10.1097/GOX.0000000000003934
  5. Zaid WY, Alshehry S, Zakhary G, et al. Use of vascularized myo-osseous fibula free flap to reconstruct a hemimandibular defect with a concomitant skull defect arising from stock condylar prosthesis displacement into the middle cranial fossa. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2019;77(6):1316.e1–1316.e12. DOI: 10.1016/j.joms.2018.12.003
  6. Knitschke M, Sonnabend S, Bäcker C, et al. Partial and total flap failure after fibula free flap in head and neck reconstructive surgery: retrospective analysis of 180 flaps over 19 years. Cancers 2021;13(4):865. DOI: 10.3390/cancers13040865
  7. Goil P, Sharma A, Kumar S, et al. Split-rib graft cranioplasty: our experience and tips to achieve optimum results. J Curr Res Sci Med 2019;5(1):44–50. DOI: 10.4103/jcrsm.jcrsm_44_18
  8. Elsalanty ME, Genecov DG. Bone grafts in craniofacial surgery. Craniomax Trauma Reconstruct 2009;2(3):125–134. DOI: 10.1055/s-0029-1215875
  9. Jeyaraj CP. Reconstruction of large calvarial defects using titanium mesh versus autologous split thickness calvarial bone grafts: a comprehensive comparative evaluation of the two major cranioplasty techniques. J Maxillofac Oral Surg 2018;17(3):308–323. DOI: 10.1007/s12663-017-1047-2
  10. Alasseri N, Alasraj A. Patient-specific implants for maxillofacial defects: challenges and solutions. Maxillofac Plast Reconstruct Surg 2020;42(1):15. DOI: 10.1186/s40902-020-00262-7
  11. Jacek B, Maciej P, Tomasz P, et al. 3D printed models in mandibular reconstruction with bony free flaps. J Mater Sci Mater Med 2018;29(3):23. DOI: 10.1007/s10856-018-6029-5
  12. Wong KC. 3D-printed patient-specific applications in orthopedics. Orthop Res Rev 2016;8:57–66. DOI: 10.2147/ORR.S99614
  13. Billiet T, Vandenhaute M, Schelfhout J, et al. A review of trends and limitations in hydrogel-rapid prototyping for tissue engineering. Biomaterials 2012;33(26):6020–6041. DOI: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2012.04.050
  14. Chen F, Miyamoto E, Takemoto M, et al. Right and left inverted lobar lung transplantation. Am J Transplant 2015;15(6):1716–1721. DOI: 10.1111/ajt.13148
  15. Park JH, Lee Y, Shon OJ, et al. Surgical tips of intramedullary nailing in severely bowed femurs in atypical femur fractures: simulation with 3D printed model. Injury 2016;47(6):1318–1324. DOI: 10.1016/j.injury.2016.02.026
  16. Orringer JS, Barcelona V, Buchman SR. Reasons for removal of rigid internal fixation devices in craniofacial surgery. J Craniofacial Surg 1998;9(1):40–44. DOI: 10.1097/00001665-199801000-00009
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.