Evaluation on the use of plate positioning guide (PPG) on the placement accuracy of post-hemimandibulectomy plate reconstruction

Bulfendri Doni; Poerwati Soetji Rahajoe; Maria Goreti Widiastuti

doi:10.22146/majkedgiind.64208

Evaluation on the use of plate positioning guide (PPG) on the placement accuracy of post-hemimandibulectomy plate reconstruction

https://doi.org/10.22146/majkedgiind.64208

Bulfendri Doni^(1*), Poerwati Soetji Rahajoe⁽²⁾, Maria Goreti Widiastuti⁽³⁾

(1) RSUD Mohammad Natsir Solok, Solok, West Sumatra, Indonesia Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Specialty Program, Faculty of Dentistry, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Yogyakarta
(2) Departement of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Faculty of Dentistry, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Yogyakarta
(3) Departement of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Faculty of Dentistry, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Yogyakarta
(*) Corresponding Author

Abstract

Improper placement of the reconstruction plate can lead to postoperative complications. Placing reconstruction plates that have arch for operation is made easier with the plate positioning guide (PPG) as a transfer method of reconstruction plate. This study aimed to assess the impact of PPG on the placement accuracy of reconstruction plate as determined by the symmetrical breadth of the mandibular arch and the consistent placement of reconstruction plate following hemimandibulectomy. According to the inclusion criteria, this was a retrospective cross-sectional study with 12 participants (n = 12) after hemimandibulectomy. Subjects were divided into PPG (n = 6) and Non-PPG (n = 6) groups. Measurement of the difference in the width of the mandibular arch and the height of the placement of the reconstruction plate between the reconstructed and non-resected sides in three positions (anterior, posterior, and angulus) was conducted using submentovertex radiographs and orthopantomogram (OPG) through the RadiAnt DICOM Viewer software. The placement accuracy of the reconstruction plates was analyzed using a one-sample t-test with p-value 0.05. The results showed that the placement accuracy of the reconstruction plate in the PPG group were accurate (p = 0.590), and the Non-PPG group was inaccurate (p = 0.000); with the independent sample test. There was a significant difference between the two groups (p = 0.000). Plate positioning guide provides better symmetry of the mandibular arch width post-hemimandibulectomy.

Keywords

accuracy of reconstruction plate placement; hemimandibulectomy; plate positioning guide (PPG)

Full Text:

PDF

References

1. Brown JS, Barry C, Ho M, Shaw R. A new classiﬁcation for mandibular defects after
oncological resection. Lancet Oncol. 2016; 17(1): e23-30.
doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(15)00310-1

2. Chen TM, Wang HJ, Cheng TY, Chang KC, Lin FH. The rationale of mandible reconstruction
in advanced oral cancer: alloplastic material versus autogenous vascularized bone graft.
Materials Science and Engineering. 2000; 13(1-2): 49-58.
doi: 10.1016/S0928-4931(00)00176-4

3. Oji C, Uguru CC, Mgbokwere U, Chukwuneke F, Ugomuoh RN, Ezike H. A technique of tongue fixation after total mandibulectomy: the Oji Spatula. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg.
2003; 41(6): 392-395. doi: 10.1016/s0266-4356(03)00167-0

4. Atilgan S, Erol B, Yardimeden A, Yaman F, Ucan MC, Gunes N, Atalay Y, Kose I. A three-dimensional analysis of reconstruction plates used in different mandibular defects.
Biotechnology & Biotechnoligal Equipment. 2010; 24(2): 1893-1896.
doi: 10.2478/V10133-010-0048-9

5. Rana M, Warraich R, Kokemüller H, Lemound J, Essig H, Tavassol F, Eckardt A, Gellrich
NC. Reconstruction of mandibular defects - clinical retrospective research over a 10-year
period-. Head Neck Oncol. 2011; 3: 23. doi: 10.1186/1758-3284-3-23

6. Abbas AT. Reconstruction skeleton for the lower human jaw using CAD/CAM/CAE.
Journal of King Saud University-Engineering Sciences. 2012; 24(2): 159-164. doi: 10.1016/j.jksues.2011.10.003

7. Narra N, Valášek J, Hannula M, Marcián P, Sándor GK, Hyttinen J, Wolff J. Finite element
analysis of customized reconstruction plates for mandibular continuity defect therapy. J
Biomech. 2014; 47(1): 264-268. doi: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2013.11.016

8. Freitag V, Hell B, Fischer H. Experience with AO reconstruction plates after partial
mandibular resection involving its continuity. J Craniomaxillofacial Surg. 1991; 19(5): 191-
198. doi: 10.1016/s1010-5182(05)80546-3

9. Klotch DW, Gal TJ, Gal RL. Assessment of plate use for mandibular reconstruction: has changing technology made a difference?. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1999; 121(4): 388-392.
doi: 10.1016/S0194-5998(99)70226-3

10. Wang TM, Chang HH, Hoa Y, Lin LD. Screw hole-positioning guide and plate-positioning
guide: a novel method to assist mandibular reconstruction. Journal of Dental Sciences.
2012; 7(3): 301-305. doi: 10.1016/j.jds.2012.06.005

11. Fariña R, Plaza C, Martinovic G. New transference technique of position of mandibular reconstructing plates using stereolithographic models. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2009; 67(11): 2544-2548. doi: 10.1016/j.joms.2009.04.086

12. Fariña R, Alister JP, Uribe F, Olate S, Arriagada A. Indications of free grafts in mandibular reconstruction, after removing benign tumors: treatment algorithm. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2016; 4(8): e845. doi: 10.1097/GOX.0000000000000832

13. Berrone M, Crosetti E, Succo G. Repositioning template for mandibular reconstruction with
fibular free flaps: an alternative technique to pre-plating and virtual surgical planning. Acta
Otorhinolaryngol Ital. 2014; 34(4): 278-282.

14. Funayama A, Kojima T, Yoshizawa M, Mikami T, Kanemaru S, Niimi K, Oda Y, Kato Y, Kobayashi T. A Simple technique for repositioning of the mandible by a surgical guide prepared using a three-dimensional model after segmental mandibulectomy. Maxillofacial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery. 2017; 39: 16. doi: 10.1186/s40902-017-0113-5

15. Liang Y, Jiang C, Wu L, Wang W, Liu Y, Jian X. Application of Combined Osteotomy
and Reconstruction Pre-Bent Plate Position (CORPPP) technology to assist in the precise
reconstruction of segmental mandibular defects. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2017; 75(9):
2026.e1-2026.e10. doi: 10.1016/j.joms.2017.04.046

16. Malyala SK, Gibson I, Kumar YR, Chakravarthy C. Mandibular Repositioning Appliance Following Resection Crossing the Midline-A3D Printed Guide. Proceedings of the 29th Annual International Solid Freeform Fabrication Symposium – An Additive Manufacturing Conference. Solid Freeform Fabrication 2018. 2018; 887-896.

17. Wilde F, Plail M, Riese C, Schramm A, Winter K. Mandible reconstruction with patientspeciﬁc
pre-bent reconstruction plates: comparison of a transfer key method to the standard method—results of an in vitro study. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg. 2012; 7(1): 57-63. doi: 10.1007/s11548-011-0599-8

18. Wilde F, Winter K, Kletsch K, Lorenz K, Schramm A. Mandible reconstruction using
patient-speciﬁc pre-bent reconstruction plates: comparison of standard and transfer
key methods. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg. 2015; 10(2): 129-140.
doi: 10.1007/s11548-014-1065-1

19. Azuma M, Yanagawa T, Ishibasi-Kanno N, Uchida F, Ito T, Yamagata K, Hasegawa S, Sasaki K, Tabuchi K, Sekido M, Bukawa H. Mandibular reconstruction using plates prebent to fit rapid prototyping 3-dimensional printing models ameliorates contour deformity. Head Face Med. 2014; 10: 45. doi: 10.1186/1746-160X-10-45

20. Kliniberg I, Earnshaw R. Physical properties of shellac baseplate materials. Australian
Dental Journal. 1967; 12(5): 468-475. doi: 10.1111/j.1834-7819.1967.tb00858.x

21. Manappallil JJ. Basic Dental Materials 4th Ed. Jaypee Brother Medical Publisher (P) Ltd.
New Delhi, India. 2016; 341-342.

22. Moraes MEL, Hollender LG, Chen CSK, Moraes LC, Balducci I. Evaluating craniofacial
asymmetry with digital cephalometric images and cone-beam computed tomography. Am
J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2011; 139(6): e523-e531. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2010.10.020

DOI: https://doi.org/10.22146/majkedgiind.64208