- Open Access
Accuracy of using computer-aided rapid prototyping templates for mandible reconstruction with an iliac crest graft
© Shu et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2014
- Received: 6 March 2014
- Accepted: 12 June 2014
- Published: 24 June 2014
This study aimed to evaluate the accuracy of surgical outcomes in free iliac crest mandibular reconstructions that were carried out with virtual surgical plans and rapid prototyping templates.
This study evaluated eight patients who underwent mandibular osteotomy and reconstruction with free iliac crest grafts using virtual surgical planning and designed guiding templates. Operations were performed using the prefabricated guiding templates. Postoperative three-dimensional computer models were overlaid and compared with the preoperatively designed models in the same coordinate system.
Compared to the virtual osteotomy, the mean error of distance of the actual mandibular osteotomy was 2.06 ± 0.86 mm. When compared to the virtual harvested grafts, the mean error volume of the actual harvested grafts was 1412.22 ± 439.24 mm3 (9.12% ± 2.84%). The mean error between the volume of the actual harvested grafts and the shaped grafts was 2094.35 ± 929.12 mm3 (12.40% ± 5.50%).
The use of computer-aided rapid prototyping templates for virtual surgical planning appears to positively influence the accuracy of mandibular reconstruction.
- Mandibular tumor
- Mandible reconstruction
- Virtual surgical planning
Surgeons often have difficulty achieving functional and aesthetic mandibular reconstructions after ablative tumor surgery [1–4]. Traditionally, surgeons have used their past experience to determine the best way to perform the osteotomy, graft harvesting, and graft shaping procedures for mandibular reconstruction. However, computer-aided (virtual) surgical planning and rapid prototyping (RP) now offer more effective and predictable reconstruction outcomes , and a series of successful studies have emerged as surgeons and RP engineers have begun to cooperate [6, 7]. Nevertheless, researchers are still wary about the accuracy of virtual surgical planning as well as donor-site morbidity. Therefore, the aim of our study was to evaluate the benefits of computer-assisted mandibular reconstruction with free iliac crest bone grafts regarding accuracy and the amount of bone loss. We present cases of mandibular reconstruction that employed virtual surgical planning, and for which we determined the accuracy of the actual reconstructions as compared to the virtual surgical plans. We also assessed how much tissue was harvested for the graft, with the goal being to take the least amount of tissue required.
This study was approved by the local ethics committee at Sun Yat-sen University, China. It was carried out after institutional approval of ethics committee of the First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University and written informed consent was obtained. The study included eight patients with ameloblastoma involving one side of the mandible. The study participants (5 males and 3 females; 19 to 54-years-old, mean = 30.6 years) underwent the osteotomy and sequential mandibular reconstruction using free iliac grafts between September 2008 and June 2012 at the Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University, China.
Surgical planning procedure
In each case, a computed tomography (CT) scan was performed (Aquilion64 CT, Toshiba, Tochigi, Japan; slice thickness = 0.5 mm) in the mandibular, maxillary, and skull base regions, as well as on the pelvis where we planned to harvest iliac crest. The scan data was imported as standard DICOM (Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine) files to Mimics software (Materialise, Leuven, Belgium).
Rapid prototyping (RP) template design
All designed templates were saved as STL files and sent to a fully automated rapid stereolithography machine (SLA3500, 3D Systems, Texas, United States) to fabricate RP templates. The final acrylic templates were duplicated from RP models.
Accuracy of postoperative results compared with virtual surgical planning
Distance of mandibular osteotomy (mm)
Volume of reconstructive graft (mm3)
Error between virtual and harvested (%)
Error between harvested and shaped (%)
30.6 ± 12.4
65.92 ± 35.08
66.21 ± 33.42
2.06 ± 0.86 (3.13% ± 1.31%)
15478.17 ± 6997.65
16890.40 ± 7395.49
14796.05 ± 6504.39
1412.22 ± 439.24 (9.12% ± 2.84%)
2094.35 ± 929.12 (12.40% ± 5.50%)
All eight mandibular reconstructions were carried out successfully. The mean error between the distance of the actual mandibular osteotomy and the distance of the virtual osteotomy was 2.06 ± 0.86 mm. The mean error of the volume of the actual harvested grafts compared to that of the virtual harvested grafts was 1412.22 ± 439.24 mm3 (9.12% ± 2.84%). The mean error between the volume of the actual harvested grafts and that of the shaped grafts was 2094.35 ± 929.12 mm3 (12.40% ± 5.50%) (Table 1).
This study indicates that computer-aided rapid prototyping templates can help surgeons perform accurate operations. The error between virtual surgical planning and the actual results are acceptable and the surgeons who participated in the surgical planning and template design felt more familiar with, and confident in, the operation procedures.
Iliac grafting is a common method of mandibular reconstruction . When surgeons plan to harvest such grafts they must consider the reconstruction effects, the graft survival rate, and the donor-site morbidity. The reconstruction effect is directly determined by the graft, which should allow for a symmetric facial contour and should fit well with the upper jaw. The survival rate of iliac grafts significantly correlates to the time they spend in vitro before the pedicled grafts are anastomosed to the recipients. The donor-site morbidity that occurs after iliac grafts are harvested, such as postoperative functional problems and pain at the donor site, mainly depend on how much bone is harvested . In our study, the contour and position of the virtually reconstructed mandibles, which were designed using the mirror duplication technique, are capable of producing excellent postoperative results in terms of occlusion and symmetrical facial contouring. Furthermore, the harvesting templates allowed for more accurate harvesting and less modification to the grafts. Finally, we found that shaping templates are reliable references that can be used to quickly shape grafts, allowing surgeons to decrease the time that grafts spend in vitro, as well as minimize unnecessary donor-site invasion.
The accuracy of our design was previously proven when we successfully removed foreign bodies from the skull base . When we applied this method to designing mandible templates we found similar results to another report  which evaluated the accuracy of free fibula mandibular reconstruction. We believe that the differences between the studies due to how the templates were designed are of little significance.
The mean difference between the actual and virtual harvested grafts was 9.12% ± 2.84%, and it was concurrent with Roser’s results  which indicate that regardless of where grafts are harvested from, controlling the accuracy of the graft harvesting procedure is always difficult. When designing templates for graft harvesting our aim was to use a minimal harvesting volume and take it from the proper location. At the same time, surgeons were reminded that the reconstructions would probably fail if they harvested less bone than the templates called for. As such, surgeons generally harvested grafts that were slightly bigger than the indicated regions. However, we believe that the more surgeons trust the guiding templates the higher the harvesting accuracy will be.
After shaping the grafts, we found that the grafts lost a mean volume of 2094.35 ± 929.12 mm3 (12.40% ± 5.50%). Therefore, the shaping templates allowed us to keep the loss rate of graft volume below 15%. We consider this percentage to represent an unnecessary injury that causes more donor-site morbidity. Several factors contribute to this loss rate: (1) The position where the harvesting template was mounted likely varied a little because of the surrounding soft tissue; (2) The harvesting margins drawn according to the template’s outline might have been enlarged because it was difficult to keep the marking pen vertical to the template; and (3) The reconstructive grafts were often cut low to reduce the suture tension.
Ayoub et al. previously evaluated computer-assisted mandibular reconstruction with vascularized iliac crest bone grafts as compared to conventional surgery. In their study, conventional surgery outcomes were clinically acceptable but had a mean error of 20% between the defect size (83.3 ± 18.7 mm) and the transplant size (which significantly exceeded the defect size by 16.8 ± 5.6 mm) . In our study, we found a mean error of only 12.40% between the volume of the defect size and that of the transplant size, which proves that computer-assisted mandibular reconstruction is capable of improving the accuracy of surgical outcomes and reducing donor-site morbidity.
We must mention that bone volume measurements obtained by software vary widely according to the thresholding parameters and the three-dimensional calculating quality one chooses. Thus, comparing software-measured graft volumes between different studies is meaningless. In our study, the software parameter was fixed for each case, however, considering that it is impossible for every researcher to use the same software parameters, we recommend using percentages to standardize comparisons.
Despite obtaining satisfactory outcomes we still found errors in distances and volumes when the treatment results were evaluated . Various factors likely contributed to these errors. First, operative errors can be decreased but they can never be eliminated completely. Second, a slight distortion exists in the CT scan model [14, 15]. Third, computer-assisted planning processes and validation processes have slight errors as well . Finally, the templates might be distorted when they are fabricated.
Our study was limited by the fact that templates cannot be modified once they are fabricated. When the affected region is unclear in preoperative CT images, such as because of osteosarcoma and radioactive osteomyelitis, positive margins might be found intraoperatively. Surgeons then must make second, wider resections, and the sequential templates are then useless. Therefore, we suggest that surgeons beware of this variation and handle it with care when planning surgical procedures.
The use of computer-aided rapid prototyping templates for virtual surgical planning appear to positively influence the accuracy of mandibular reconstruction.
Thanks to Qing-fen Hong for CT data collection.
- Li JS, Chen WL, Huang ZQ, Zhang DM: Pediatric mandibular reconstruction after benign tumor ablation using a vascularized fibular flap. J CraniofacSurg. 2009, 20: 431-434.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Hallermann W, Olsen S, Bardyn T, Taghizadeh F, Banic A, Iizuka T: A new method for computer-aided operation planning for extensive mandibular reconstruction. PlastReconstrSurg. 2006, 117: 2431-2437.Google Scholar
- Z'Graggen M, Schiel HJ, Kunz C, Lambrecht JT: Three-dimensional cephalometry using individual skeletal laser technology models. ClinAnat. 2001, 14: 258-268.Google Scholar
- Goh BT, Lee S, Tideman H, Stoelinga PJ: Mandibular reconstruction in adults: a review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2008, 37: 597-605. 10.1016/j.ijom.2008.03.002.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Goiato MC, Santos MR, Pesqueira AA, Moreno A, dos Santos DM, Haddad MF: Prototyping for surgical and prosthetic treatment. J CraniofacSurg. 2011, 22: 914-917.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Feng F, Wang H, Guan X, Tian W, Jing W, Long J, Tang W, Liu L: Mirror imaging and preshaped titanium plates in the treatment of unilateral malar and zygomatic arch fractures. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral RadiolEndod. 2011, 112: 188-194. 10.1016/j.tripleo.2010.10.014.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Liu XJ, Gui L, Mao C, Peng X, Yu GY: Applying computer techniques in maxillofacial reconstruction using a fibula flap: a messenger and an evaluation method. J CraniofacSurg. 2009, 20: 372-377.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Miyamoto S, Sakuraba M, Nagamatsu S, Hayashi R: Current role of the iliac crest flap in mandibular reconstruction. Microsurgery. 2011, 31: 616-619. 10.1002/micr.20929.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Ghassemi A, Ghassemi M, Riediger D, Hilgers RD, Gerressen M: Comparison of donor-site engraftment after harvesting vascularized and nonvascularized iliac bone grafts. J Oral MaxillofacSurg. 2009, 67: 1589-1594. 10.1016/j.joms.2009.04.013.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Wei R, Xiang-Zhen L, Bing G, Da-Long S, Ze-Ming T: Removal of a foreign body from the skull base using a customized computer-designed guide bar. J CraniomaxillofacSurg. 2010, 38: 279-283. 10.1016/j.jcms.2009.07.006.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Roser SM, Ramachandra S, Blair H, Grist W, Carlson GW, Christensen AM, Weimer KA, Steed MB: The accuracy of virtual surgical planning in free fibula mandibular reconstruction: comparison of planned and final results. J Oral MaxillofacSurg. 2010, 68: 2824-2832. 10.1016/j.joms.2010.06.177.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Ayoub N, Ghassemi A, Rana M, Gerressen M, Riediger D, Holzle F, Modabber A: Evaluation of computer-assisted mandibular reconstruction with vascularized iliac crest bone graft compared to conventional surgery: a randomized prospective clinical trial. Trials. 2014, 15: 114-10.1186/1745-6215-15-114.PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Liu XZ, Shu DL, Ran W, Guo B, Liao X: Digital surgical templates for managing high-energy zygomaticomaxillary complex injuries associated with orbital volume change: a quantitative assessment. J Oral MaxillofacSurg. 2013, 71: 1712-1723. 10.1016/j.joms.2013.06.197.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Mueller CK, Zeiss F, Mtsariashvili M, Thorwarth M, Schultze-Mosgau S: Correlation between clinical findings and CT-measured displacement in patients with fractures of the zygomaticomaxillary complex. J CraniomaxillofacSurg. 2012, 40: e93-e98. 10.1016/j.jcms.2011.05.009.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Oka K, Murase T, Moritomo H, Goto A, Sugamoto K, Yoshikawa H: Accuracy analysis of three-dimensional bone surface models of the forearm constructed from multidetector computed tomography data. Int J Med Robot. 2009, 5: 452-457. 10.1002/rcs.277.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Verhamme LM, Meijer GJ, Boumans T, Schutyser F, Berge SJ, Maal TJ: A clinically relevant validation method for implant placement after virtual planning. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2012, doi:10.1111/j.1600-0501.2012.02565.xGoogle Scholar
This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.