Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery

, Volume 19, Issue 3, pp 293–300 | Cite as

Comparison of intraoperative time measurements between osseous reconstructions with free fibula flaps applying computer-aided designed/computer-aided manufactured and conventional techniques

  • Jan Rustemeyer
  • Aynur Sari-Rieger
  • Alex Melenberg
  • Alexander Busch
Original Article

Abstract

Purpose

We aimed to determine whether computer-aided designed/computer-aided manufactured (CAD/CAM) techniques could save intraoperative time compared with the conventional technique, by comparing flap harvesting and ischemia times, and subsequently impact flap survival.

Methods

Twenty patients underwent concurrent osteocutaneous fibula flaps, either with (n = 10) or without (n = 10) the CAD/CAM technique. Demographic data, clinical history, complications, number of osseous segments, and times for virtual planning, flap harvesting, flap ischemia, tourniquet inflation, and total reconstruction were recorded.

Results

There was no significant difference between CAD/CAM and conventional techniques with respect to age, number of osseous segments, complication rates, and tourniquet inflation time. Flap harvesting times were significantly shorter in the conventional group (112.1 vs. 142.2 min, p < 0.001), while flap ischemia and total ischemia times were significantly shorter in the CAD/CAM group (70.7 vs. 98.6 min, p < 0.001; 174.8 vs. 198.9 min, p = 0.002, respectively). However, while total reconstruction time did not differ between groups, overall operating time (including the amount of virtual planning time and surgical reconstruction time) was significantly longer in the CAD/CAM group (mean 256.0 vs. 210.7 min, p < 0.001).

Conclusions

Despite the advantages of the CAD/CAM technique, including reduced ischemia time of osteocutaneous fibula flaps, there is no impact on total reconstruction time or flap survival.

Keywords

Fibula flap Reconstruction Virtual surgery CAD/CAM Ischemia time Flap survival 

Notes

Conflict of interest

The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

References

  1. 1.
    Roser SM, Ramachandra S, Blair H, Grist W, Carlson GW, Christensen AM, Weimer KA, Steed MB (2010) The accuracy of virtual surgical planning in free fibula mandibular reconstruction: comparison of planned and final results. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 68:2824–2832CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Mazzoni S, Marchetti C, Sgarzani R, Cipriani R, Scotti R et al (2013) Prosthetically guided maxillofacial surgery: evaluation of the accuracy of a surgical guide and custom-made bone plate in oncology patients after mandibular reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg 131:1376–1385CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Saad A, Winters R, Wise MW, Dupin CL, St Hilaire H (2013) Virtual surgical planning in complex composite maxillofacial reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg 132:626–633CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ghazali N, Collyer JC, Tighe JV (2013) Hemimandibulectomy and vascularized fibula flap in bisphosphonate-induced mandibular osteonecrosis with polycythaemia rubra vera. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 42:120–123CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Tepper OM, Sorice S, Hershman GN, Saadeh P, Levine JP, Hirsch D (2011) Use of virtual 3-dimensional surgery in post-traumatic craniomaxillofacial reconstruction. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 69:733–741CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hanasono MM, Skoracki RJ (2012) Computer-assisted design and rapid prototype modeling in microvascular mandible reconstruction. Laryngoscope 123:597–604CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hou J, Chen M, Pan CB, Tao Q, Wang JG, Wang C, Zhang B, Huang HZ (2011) Immediate reconstruction of bilateral mandible defects: management based on computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing rapid prototyping technology in combination with vascularized fibular osteomyocutaneous flap. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 69:1792–1797CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hayden R, Mullin D, Patel A (2012) Reconstruction of the segmental mandibular defect: current state of the art. Curr Opin Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 20:231–236CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Levine JP, Patel A, Saadeh PB, Hirsch DL (2012) Computer-aided design and manufacturing in craniomaxillofacial surgery: the new state of the art. J Craniofac Surg 23:288–293CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Foley BD, Thayer WP, Honeybrook A, McKenna S, Press S (2013) Mandibular reconstruction using computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing: an analysis of surgical results. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 71:e111–e119CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Marchetti C, Bianchi A, Manzoni S, Cipriani R, Campobassi A (2006) Oromandibular reconstruction using a fibula osteocutaneous free flap: four different “preplating” techniques. Plast Reconstr Surg 118:643–651CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hirsch DL, Garfein ES, Christensen AM, Weimer KA, Saddeh PB, Levine JP (2009) Use of computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing to produce orthognathically ideal surgical outcomes: a paradigm shift in head and neck reconstruction. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 67:2115–2122CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Antony AK, Chen WF, Kolokythas A, Weimer KA, Cohen MN (2011) Use of virtual surgery and stereolithography-guided osteotomy for mandibular reconstruction with the free fibula. Plast Reconstr Surg 128:1080–1084CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Seruya M, Fisher M, Rodriguez ED (2013) Computer-assisted versus conventional free fibula flap technique for craniofacial reconstruction: an outcomes comparison. Plast Reconstr Surg 132:1219–1228CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Matros E, Disa JJ (2013) Discussion: computer-assisted versus conventional free fibula flap technique for craniofacial reconstruction: an outcomes comparison. Plast Reconstr Surg 132:1229–1230CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Boyd JB, Gullane PJ, Brown DH (1993) Classification of mandibular defects. Plast Reconstr Surg 92:1266–1275PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Okay DJ, Genden E, Buchbinder D, Urken M (2001) Prosthodontic guidelines for surgical reconstruction of the maxilla: a classification system of defects. J Prosthet Dent 86:352–363CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hidalgo DA (1989) Fibula free flap: a new method of mandible reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg 84:71–79CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Hicks RW, Denholm B (2013) Implementing AORN recommended practices for care of patients undergoing pneumatic tourniquet-assisted procedures. AORN J 98:383–393CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Sharaf B, Levine JP, Hirsch DL, Bastidas JA, Schiff BA, Garfein ES (2010) Importance of computer-aided design and manufacturing technology in the multidisciplinary approach to head and neck reconstruction. J Craniofac Surg 21:1277–1280CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Schepers RH, Raghoebar GM, Vissink A, Lahoda LU, Van der Meer WJ, Roodenburg JL, Reintsema H, Witjes MJ (2013) Fully 3-dimensional digitally planned reconstruction of a mandible with a free vascularized fibula and immediate placement of an implant-supported prosthetic construction. Head Neck 35:E109–114CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ayoub N, Ghassemi A, Rana M, Gerressen M, Riediger D, Hölzle F, Modabber A (2014) Evaluation of computer-assisted mandibular reconstruction with vascularized iliac crest bone graft compared to conventional surgery: a randomized prospective clinical trial. Trials 15:114PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Rustemeyer J, Melenberg A, Sari-Rieger A (2014) Costs incurred by applying computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing technique for reconstructing maxillofacial defects. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 42:2049–2055CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Hayden RE (2014) Reconstruction of the composite oromandibular defect: fibular free flap. In: Genden EM (ed) Reconstructive surgery, 1st edn. Wolters Kluwer Health, Philadelphia, pp 103–116Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Chang SY, Huang JJ, Tsao CK, Nguyen A, Mittakanti K, Lin CY, Cheng MH (2010) Does ischemia time affect the outcome of free fibula flaps for head and neck reconstruction? A review of 116 cases. Plast Reconstr Surg 126:1988–1995CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Modabber A, Legros C, Rana M, Gerressen M, Riediger D, Ghassemi A (2012) Evaluation of computer-assisted jaw reconstruction with free vascularized fibular flap compared to conventional surgery: a clinical pilot study. Int J Med Robot 8:215–220CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Succo G, Berrone M, Battiston B, Tos P, Goia F, Appendino P, Crosetti E (2014) Step-by-step surgical technique for mandibular reconstruction with fibular free flap: application of digital technology in virtual surgical planning. Eur Arch OtorhinolaryngolGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Xia JJ, Phillips CV, Gateno J, Teichgraeber JF, Christensen AM, Gliddon MJ, Lemoine JJ, Liebschner MA (2006) Cost-effectiveness analysis for computer-aided surgical simulation in complex cranio-maxillofacial surgery. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 64:1780–1784CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jan Rustemeyer
    • 1
  • Aynur Sari-Rieger
    • 1
  • Alex Melenberg
    • 1
  • Alexander Busch
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Plastic Operations, Klinikum Bremen-Mitte, School of MedicineUniversity of GöttingenBremenGermany

Personalised recommendations