EVALUATION OF BONE FRAGMENTS REPOSITION ACCURACY IN PATIENT WITH CONDYLAR HEAD FRACTURES USING NAVIGATION GUIDES AND PATIENT-SPECIFIC FIXATORS

Pavlychuk T., Chepurnyi Y., Kopchak A.

DENTISTRY

Scentific article

One of the possible ways to increase the accuracy of bone fragments reposition in patients with condylar head fractures (CHF’s) is the use of computer diagnostics, virtual simulation of surgery, intraoperative navigation and CAD/CAM technology. The aim of present study was to evaluate the accuracy of repositioning of bone fragments in patient with CHF’s using specific fixators, navigation and repositioning guides in comparison with traditional methods of osteosynthesis according to multislice computed tomography. The patients were divided into two groups according to the type of surgery. At the first group patients were treated with the use of traditional technique and the second group – with the use of CAD/CAM technology. In all cases a 3D comparison was performed and deviations between the virtually planned and actual postoperative position of the condylar head were evaluated based on the CT data. The outer surfaces of both models (virtually planed and actual postoperative position) were selected for comparison. It was found that the average deviation between points at the 3D models obtained from postoperative CT and virtual plan was 1.02±0.56 mm at the first group and 1.05±0.46 mm in group with the use of CAD/CAM technology (p>0.05). The maximum deviations in the second group ranged from 1.4 to 4.2 average 3.3±0.87 mm. In the first group, this number were probably larger (U, p<0.05) average 5.05±2.5 mm (from 2.5 to 10.5). Conclusion. The use of CAD/CAM technologies in treatment patients with CHF’s can significantly increase the accuracy of bone fragments repositioning. The maximum deviation between the virtual plan and the obtained result according to CT data is reduced by an average of 40% compared to traditional methods of osteosynthesys.

condylar head fracture, CAD/CAM technology, surgical guides, individualized plate.

1. Perry JF. The Temporomandibular Joint. In: Levangie PK, Norkin CC, editors. Joint structure and function: a comprehensive analysis. 3rd ed. Philadelphia: F.A. Davis Company; 2001. p. 185-95.
2. Kolk A, Neff A. Long-term results of ORIF of condylar head fractures of the mandible: A prospective 5-year follow-up study of small-fragment positional-screw osteosynthesis (SFPSO). J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2015;43(4):452-61.
3. Eckelt U, Schneider M, Erasmus F, Gerlach KL, Kuhlisch E. Open versus closed treatment of fractures of the mandibular condylar processa prospective randomized multi-centre study. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2006;34:306-14.
4. Hlawitschka M, Loukota R, Eckelt U. Functional and radiological results of open and closed treatment of intracapsular (diacapitular) condylar fractures of the mandible. Int. J. Oral Maxillofac. Surg. 2005;34:597-604.
5. Neff A, Kolk A, Meschke F, Deppe H, Horch HH. Small fragment screws vs. plate osteosynthesis in condylar head fractures. Mund Kiefer Gesichtschir. 2005;9(2):80-8.
6. Neff A, Muhlberger G, Karoglan M, Kolk A, Mittelmeier W, Scheruhn D, et al. Stability of osteosyntheses for condylar head fractures in the clinic and biome-chanical simulation. Mund Kiefer Gesichtschir. 2004;8(2):63-74.
7. Rasse M. NeuereEntwicklungen der Therapie der Gelenkfortsatzbruche¨ der Mandibula (Recent developments in therapy of condylar fractures of the mandible). Mund Kiefer Gesichtschir. 2000;4:69-87.
8. Al-Moraissi EA, Ellis E. 3rd. Surgical treatment of adult mandibular condylar fractures provides better outcomes than closed treatment: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2015;73:482-93.
9. Neff A. Open reduction and internal fixation in temporomandibular joint traumatology: current concepts and future perspectives. Stomatological Dis Sci. 2019;3:2.
10. Huang MF, Alfi D, Alfi J, Huang AT. The Use of Patient-Specific Implants in Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery. Oral Maxillofac Surg Clin North Am. 2019;31(4):593-600. DOI: 10.1016/j.coms.2019.07.010
11. Chepurnyi Y, Chernogorskyi D, Kopchak A, Petrenko O. Clinical efficacy of peek patient-specific implants in orbital reconstruction. J Oral Biol Craniofac Res. 2020;10(2):49-53.
12. Suojanen J, Leikola J, Stoor P. The use of patient-specific implants in orthognathic surgery: a series of 32 maxillary osteotomy patients. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2016;44(12):1913-6. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcms.2016.09.008
13. Han C, Dilxat D, Zhang X, Li H, Chen J, Liu L. Does Intra-operative Navigation Improve the Anatomical Reduction of Intracapsular Condylar Fractures? J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2018 Dec;76(12):2583-91. DOI: 10.1016/j.joms.2018.07.030
14. Ming-liang Yang, Bin Zhang, Qing Zhou, Xiao-bo Gao, Qiang Liu, Li Lu. Minimally-invasive open reduction of intracapsular condylar fractures with preoperative simulation using computer-aided design. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2013;51:29-33.
15. Wang WH, Deng JY, Zhu J, Li M, Xia B, Xu B. Computer-assisted virtual technology in intracapsular condylar fracture with two resorbable long-screws. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2013;51:138-43.
16. Neff A, Cornelius CP, Rasse M, Torre DD, Audigé L. The comprehensive AOCMF classification system: condylar process fractures – level 3 tutorial. Craniomaxillofac. Trauma Reconstr. 2014;7:44-58.
17. Axhausen G. Die operative Freilegung des Kiefergelenks. Chirurg 3. 1931. р. 713-9.
18. Bockenheimer P. Eine neue Methode zur Freilegung des Kiefergelenke ohne sitchbare Narben und ohne Veletzung des Nervus facialis. Zentalbl Chir. 1920;47:1560-79.
19. Hlawitschka M, Eckelt U. Assessment of patients treated for intracapsular fractures of the mandibular condyle by closed techniques. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2002;60:784-91.
20. Key JA. Positive pressure in arthrodesis for tuberculosis of the knee joint. South Med J. 1932;25:909.
21. Danis R. Real purpose and hazards of osteosynthesis. Lyon Chir. 1956;51:740.
22. Schenk RK, Muller J, Zinkernagel R, Willenegger H. Ultrastructure of normal and abnormal bone repair. Calcif Tissue Res. 1970;Suppl:110-1. DOI: 10.1007/BF02152377

«Bulletin of problems biology and medicine» Issue 3 (157), 2020 year, 341-347 pages, index UDK 616.716.4-089.21-74-047.44

10.29254/2077-4214-2020-3-157-341-347