Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Maxillofacial Reconstruction Using Polyetheretherketone Patient-Specific Implants by “Mirroring” Computational Planning

  • Case Report
  • Published:
Aesthetic Plastic Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In the vast majority of cases, precise symmetric reconstruction of maxillofacial defects remains an unsolved problem for craniofacial surgeons. Computer-designed alloplastic implants have contributed considerably to improvement in the accuracy and reliability of facial rehabilitation, rapidly becoming an irreplaceable part of the surgical armamentarium. In recent years, the subsequently developed new generation of computational technologies has allowed planning to be done by preoperative “mirroring” using the healthy side as a template to fabricate an ideal prosthesis for reestablishment of facial symmetry. Two cases of facial defects are reported, one of the midface and another of the lower face reconstructed using a computer-designed polyetheretherketone (PEEK) patient-specific implant (PSI) technique based on “mirroring” computational planning.

Level of Evidence V This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors at www.springer.com/00266.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10

References

  1. Tessier P (1982) Autogenous bone grafts taken from the calvarium for facial and cranial applications. Clin Plast Surg 9:531–538

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Binder WJ (2008) Custom-designed facial implants. Facial Plast Surg Clin North Am 16:133–146

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Binder WJ, Azizzadeh B (2008) Malar and submalar augmentation. Facial Plast Surg Clin North Am 16:11–32

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Quatela VC, Chow J (2008) Synthetic facial implants. Facial Plast Surg Clin North Am 16:1–10

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Terino EO, Edwards MC (2008) Customizing jawlines: the art of alloplastic premandible contouring. Facial Plast Surg Clin North Am 16:99–122

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Terino EO, Edwards MC (2008) Alloplastic contouring for suborbital, maxillary, zygomatic deficiencies. Facial Plast Surg Clin North Am 16:33–67

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Scolozzi P, Martinez A, Jaques B (2007) Complex orbitofrontotemporal reconstruction using computer-designed PEEK implant. J Craniofac Surg 18:224–228

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Kim MM, Boahene KD, Byrne PJ (2009) Use of customized polyetheretherketone (PEEK) implants in the reconstruction of complex maxillofacial defects. Arch Facial Plast Surg 11:53–57

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Niamtu J III (2010) Essentials of cheek and midface implants. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 68:1420–1429

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Westendorff C, Gulicher D, Dammann F, Reinert S, Hoffmann J (2006) Computer-assisted surgical treatment of orbitozygomatic fractures. J Craniofac Surg 17:837–842

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Fuller SC, Strong EB (2007) Computer applications in facial plastic and reconstructive surgery. Curr Opin Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 15:233–237

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Scolozzi P, Terzic A (2010) “Mirroring” computational planning, Navigation Guidance System, and intraoperative mobile C-arm cone-beam computed tomography with flat-panel detector: a new rationale in primary and secondary treatment of midfacial fractures? J Oral Maxillofac Surg 69:1697–1707

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. PEEK-OPTTIMA (2004) Polymer processing guide. Invibio Ltd., Thornton-Cleveleys, UK, pp 1–14

  14. William DF, McNamara A (1987) Potential of polyetheretherketone (PEEK) and carbon-fibre-reinforced PEEK in medical application. J Mater Science Lett 6:188–190

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Schlegel J, Green S (2002) Polyetheretherketones (PEEK): a biocompatible high-performance plastic. Med Plast 14:1–10

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Paolo Scolozzi.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Scolozzi, P. Maxillofacial Reconstruction Using Polyetheretherketone Patient-Specific Implants by “Mirroring” Computational Planning. Aesth Plast Surg 36, 660–665 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-011-9853-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-011-9853-2

Keywords

Navigation