The Use of Patient Specific Implants and Genioplasty to refine the results of Orthognathic Surgery in Severe Facial Asymmetry

2018 ◽  
Vol 56 (10) ◽  
pp. e44-e45 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katy Martin ◽  
Mohammed Anabtawi ◽  
Nicholas Lee
2020 ◽  
Vol Publish Ahead of Print ◽  
Author(s):  
Sergio Olate ◽  
Claudio Huetequeo-Molina ◽  
Roberto Requena ◽  
Francisca Uribe

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yiu Yan LEUNG ◽  
Jasper Ka Chai LEUNG ◽  
Alvin Tsz Choi LI ◽  
Nathan En Zuo TEO ◽  
Karen Pui Yan LEUNG ◽  
...  

Abstract The design and fabrication of three-dimensional (3D) -printed patient-specific implants (PSIs) for orthognathic surgery are customarily outsourced to commercial companies. We propose a protocol of designing PSIs and surgical guides by orthognathic surgeons-in-charge instead for wafer-less Le Fort I osteotomy. The aim of this prospective study was to evaluate the accuracy and post-operative complications of PSIs that are designed in-house for Le Fort I osteotomy. The post-operative cone beam computer tomography (CBCT) model of the maxilla was superimposed to the virtual surgical planning to compare the discrepancies of pre-determined landmarks, lines and principal axes between the two models. Twenty-five patients (12 males, 13 females) were included. The median linear deviations of the post-operative maxilla of the x, y and z axes were 0.74 mm, 0.75 mm and 0.72 mm, respectively. The deviations in the principal axes for pitch, yaw and roll were 1.40°, 0.90° and 0.60°, respectively. There were no post-operative complications related to the PSIs in the follow-up period. The 3D-printed PSIs designed in-house for wafer-less Le Fort I osteotomy are accurate and safe. Its clinical outcomes and accuracy are comparable to commercial PSIs for orthognathic surgery.


2016 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 264-267 ◽  
Author(s):  
Femke Staal ◽  
Britt Pluijmers ◽  
Eppo Wolvius ◽  
Maarten Koudstaal

Craniofacial microsomia (CFM) is a congenital anomaly with a variable phenotype. The most prominent feature of CFM is a predominantly unilateral hypoplasia of the mandible, leading to facial asymmetry. Even after correction of the midline, there is often a remaining hard- and soft-tissue deficiency over the body of the mandible and cheek on the affected side. This clinical report describes the skeletal augmentation of the mandible with a patient-specific implant to treat residual facial asymmetry in two female patients with unilateral CFM. Good aesthetic results were achieved in both patients treated with either a Medpor or polyetheretherketone implant without complications after a follow-up time of 55 and 30 months, respectively.


2015 ◽  
Vol 43 (3) ◽  
pp. 319-322 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas Gander ◽  
Marius Bredell ◽  
Theodore Eliades ◽  
Martin Rücker ◽  
Harald Essig

2021 ◽  
Vol 148 (5) ◽  
pp. 1101-1110
Author(s):  
Biao Li ◽  
Hongpu Wei ◽  
Tengfei Jiang ◽  
Yifeng Qian ◽  
Tianjia Zhang ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 47 (6) ◽  
pp. 847-853 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas Rückschloß ◽  
Oliver Ristow ◽  
Michael Müller ◽  
Reinald Kühle ◽  
Sebastian Zingler ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 37 (3) ◽  
pp. 109-113
Author(s):  
Manolis Manolakakis ◽  
Ryan Richards

Dentofacial deformities can have a profound impact on patients’ function and facial aesthetics. Traditionally, dentofacial deformities and malocclusion have been managed with growth modification, orthodontic therapy, and orthognathic surgery, or a combination of these modalities. The aim of this article is to discuss the use of patient-specific alloplastic implants as an adjunct or alternative to orthognathic surgery in patients with dentofacial deformities. A 40-year-old man who previously underwent surgically assisted rapid palatal expansion followed by LeFort I osteotomy advancement, intraoral vertical ramus osteotomy setback (IVRO), rhinoplasty, and fat transfer to the malar region presented with a chief complaint of dissatisfaction due to significant facial asymmetry. Tear trough deformity, concave nasal dorsum with nasal tip deviation to the left, submalar fullness, chin deviation to the right, and a poorly defined mandibular border outline were all noted on physical examination. The patient was treated with lower lid blepharoplasty with fat repositioning, buccal fat pad reduction (bichectomy), and patient-specific malar and mandibular border implants. In a patient who has a moderate-to-severe malocclusion and dentofacial deformity, traditional treatment includes orthodontic correction and orthognathic surgery. Patients undergoing primary orthognathic surgery can benefit from alloplastic implants. For patients who have residual maxillary or mandibular asymmetry after orthognathic surgery, the treatment options are secondary orthognathic procedures or facial implants. These patients can benefit from treatment with alloplastic facial implants as an adjunct or alternative to orthognathic surgery to normalize skeletal contours and improve facial aesthetics. Patient-specific alloplastic implants can be used as a powerful adjunct or alternative to orthognathic surgery. Patients with mild occlusal and skeletal deformities who have traditionally been treated with orthodontic therapy alone can benefit from evaluation of alloplastic implants. Patients with residual asymmetries after orthognathic surgery can benefit from alloplastic implants as an adjunct with secondary osteotomies or as an alternative altogether.


Author(s):  
Leanne SOBEL ◽  
Katrina SKELLERN ◽  
Kat PEREIRA

Design thinking and human-centred design is often discussed and utilised by teams and organisations seeking to develop more optimal, effective or innovative solutions for better customer outcomes. In the healthcare sector the opportunity presented by the practice of human-centred design and design thinking in the pursuit of better patient outcomes is a natural alignment. However, healthcare challenges often involve complex problem sets, many stakeholders, large systems and actors that resist change. High-levels of investment and risk aversion results in the status quo of traditional technology-led processes and analytical decision-making dominating product and strategy development. In this case study we present the opportunities, challenges and benefits that including a design-led approach in developing complex healthcare technology can bring. Drawing on interviews with participants and reflections from the project team, we explore and articulate the key learning from using a design-led approach. In particular we discuss how design-led practices that place patients at the heart of technology development facilitated the project team in aligning key stakeholders, unearthing critical system considerations, and identifying product and sector-wide opportunities.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document