Tibiofibular Synostosis—An Unusual Case During Vascularized Fibula Flap Harvest

2010 ◽  
Vol 68 (10) ◽  
pp. 2629-2631 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joshua Lubek ◽  
Amro Shihabi ◽  
Andrew Salama
2019 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 274-283
Author(s):  
Dinesh Kadam

Primary restoration of the mandibular continuity remains the standard of care for defects, and yet several constraints preclude this objective. Interim reconstructions with plate and nonvascular bone grafts have high failure rates. The secondary reconstruction, when becomes inevitable, remains a formidable task. This retrospective study evaluates various issues to address secondary reconstruction. Twenty-one patients following mandibulectomy presented with various complications between 2012 and 2016 were included in the study. The profile of primary reconstruction includes reconstruction plate ( n = 9), reconstruction plate with rib graft ( n = 3), soft tissue only reconstruction ( n = 4), free fibula ( n = 2), inadequate growth of reconstructed free fibula during adolescence ( n = 1), nonvascular bone graft alone ( n = 1), and no reconstruction ( n = 1). All had problems or complications related to unsatisfactory primary reconstruction such as plate fracture, recurrent infection, plate exposure, deformity, malocclusion, and failed fibula reconstruction. All were reconstructed with osteocutaneous free fibula flap with repair of soft-tissue loss. All flaps survived and had satisfactory outcome functionally and aesthetically. Dental rehabilitation was done in four patients. One flap was reexplored for thrombosis and salvaged. The challenges in secondary reconstruction include difficulty in recreating true defects, extensive fibrosis and loss of planes, unanticipated soft-tissue and skeletal defects, reestablishing the contour and occlusion, insufficient bone strength, dearth of suitable recipient vessels, nonpliable skin, tissue contraction to accommodate new mandible, need of additional flap for defect closure, and postirradiation effects. Notwithstanding them, the reasonable successful outcome can be attainable.


2020 ◽  
Vol 40 (5) ◽  
pp. 2751-2755
Author(s):  
MATTHEW R. CLAXTON ◽  
MATTHEW B. SHIRLEY ◽  
KARIM BAKRI ◽  
PETER S. ROSE ◽  
STEVEN L. MORAN ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 ◽  
pp. 1-14
Author(s):  
Xian Li ◽  
Chao Jiang ◽  
Hui Gao ◽  
Chunjuan Wang ◽  
Chao Wang ◽  
...  

Several different methods exist for reconstructing the mandibular body and ramus defect with the use of a free vascularized fibula flap, but none have adequately addressed the long-term mechanical stability and osseointegration. The aim of this study is to compare the biomechanics of different surgical methods and to investigate the best approach for reconstructing the mandibular body and ramus defect. Five finite element models based on different reconstructive methods were simulated. Stress, strain, and displacement of connective bone sections were calculated for five models and compared. The models were printed using a 3D printer, and stiffness was measured using an electromechanical universal testing machine. The postoperative follow-up cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) was taken at different time points to analyze bone mineral density of connective bone sections. The results showed that the “double up” (DU) model was the most efficient for reconstructing a mandibular body and ramus defect by comparing the mechanical distribution of three sections under vertical and inclined loading conditions of 100 N. The stiffness detection showed that stiffness in the DU and “double down” (DD) models was higher compared with the “single up” (SU), “single down” (SD), and “distraction osteogenesis” (DO) models. We used the DU model for the surgery, and postoperative follow-up CBCT showed that bone mineral density of each fibular connective section increased gradually with time, plateauing at 12 weeks. We conclude that a free vascularized fibula flap of the DU type was the best approach for the reconstruction of the mandibular body and ramus defect. Preoperative finite element analysis and stiffness testing were shown to be very useful for maxillofacial reconstruction.


2015 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 821-825 ◽  
Author(s):  
Salih Onur Basat ◽  
Ali Rıza Öreroğlu ◽  
Cagdas Orman ◽  
Tolga Aksan ◽  
İlker Üsçetin ◽  
...  

2009 ◽  
Vol 35 (4) ◽  
pp. 373-379 ◽  
Author(s):  
P.F. Nocini ◽  
G. Saia ◽  
G. Bettini ◽  
M. Ragazzo ◽  
S. Blandamura ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document