Repairing Cranial Defect With Autogenous Mandibular Outer Plate.
Journal
The Journal of craniofacial surgery
ISSN: 1536-3732
Titre abrégé: J Craniofac Surg
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 9010410
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Sep 2020
Sep 2020
Historique:
pubmed:
31
5
2020
medline:
12
1
2021
entrez:
31
5
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Autogenous bone is the best material in cranioplasty because of biological advantages. Previously, skull, rib, ilium, and fibula have been used in the reconstruction of cranial defects. However, the application of autologous mandibular outer plate in the treatment of skull defect is rarely reported. This study evaluated the application of the autogenous mandibular outer plate in the reconstruction of cranial defect. Eleven patients who underwent cranioplasty with mandibular outer plate were recruited. Three-dimensional tomography data were collected to calculate the preoperative, immediate postoperative, and long-term follow-up volume of the bone graft area and donor bone site, and then the absorption rate and the regeneration rate of autogenous bone were analyzed. The majority of the patients were satisfied with the reconstructive outcome. There are statistical differences in the volumetric measurements of the bone graft area and bone donor site at different time periods (P<0.05). The mean absorptivity of mandibular outer plate implanted in the cranial defect area was (17.30 ± 5.03)% after 3 to 24 months postoperatively, the average regeneration rate of mandibular outer plate volume was (41.65 ± 9.85)% at the same period. This report shows that the cranioplasty with mandibular outer plate bone graft may be an optional surgical procedure.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Autogenous bone is the best material in cranioplasty because of biological advantages. Previously, skull, rib, ilium, and fibula have been used in the reconstruction of cranial defects. However, the application of autologous mandibular outer plate in the treatment of skull defect is rarely reported. This study evaluated the application of the autogenous mandibular outer plate in the reconstruction of cranial defect.
METHODS
METHODS
Eleven patients who underwent cranioplasty with mandibular outer plate were recruited. Three-dimensional tomography data were collected to calculate the preoperative, immediate postoperative, and long-term follow-up volume of the bone graft area and donor bone site, and then the absorption rate and the regeneration rate of autogenous bone were analyzed.
RESULTS
RESULTS
The majority of the patients were satisfied with the reconstructive outcome. There are statistical differences in the volumetric measurements of the bone graft area and bone donor site at different time periods (P<0.05). The mean absorptivity of mandibular outer plate implanted in the cranial defect area was (17.30 ± 5.03)% after 3 to 24 months postoperatively, the average regeneration rate of mandibular outer plate volume was (41.65 ± 9.85)% at the same period.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
This report shows that the cranioplasty with mandibular outer plate bone graft may be an optional surgical procedure.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32472872
doi: 10.1097/SCS.0000000000006578
pii: 00001665-202009000-00063
doi:
Types de publication
Case Reports
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
1768-1772Références
Reddy S, Khalifian S, Flores JM, et al. Clinical outcomes in cranioplasty: risk factors and choice of reconstructive material. Plast Reconstr Surg 2014; 133:864873.
Iwama T, Yamada J, Imai S, et al. The use of frozen autogenous bone flaps in delayed cranioplasty revisited. Neurosurgery 2003; 52:591596.
Rogers GF, Greene AK, Mulliken JB, et al. Exchange cranioplasty using autologous calvarial particulate bone graft effectively repairs large cranial defects. Plast Reconstr Surg 2011; 127:16311642.
Zins JE, Langevin CJ, Nasir S. Controversies in skull reconstruction. J Craniofac Surg 2010; 21:17551760.
Artico M, Ferrante L, Pastore FS, et al. Bone autografting of the calvaria and craniofacial skeleton: historical background, surgical results in a series of 15 patients, and review of the literature. Surg Neurol 2003; 60:7179.
Kosaka M, Matsuzawa Y, Mori H, et al. Orbital wall reconstruction with bone grafts from the outer cortex of the mandible. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 2004; 32:374380.
Herford AS. Dorsal nasal reconstruction using bone harvested from the mandible. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2004; 62:10821087.
Misch CM. Use of the mandibular ramus as a donor site for onlay bone grafting. J Oral Implantol 2000; 26:4249.
Sand JP, Diaz JA, Nussenbaum B, et al. Full-thickness scalp defects reconstructed with outer table calvarial decortication and surface grafting. JAMA Facial Plast Surg 2017; 19:7476.
Toriyama K, Hatano H, Yagi S, et al. Long follow-up of cranofacial cleft treated by the folded vascularized calvarial bone. J Craniofac Surg 2013; 24:e202e203.
Johansson B, Grepe A, Wannfors K, et al. A clinical study of changes in the volume of bone grafts in the atrophic maxilla. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2001; 30:157161.
Sbordone L, Toti P, Menchini-Fabris GB, et al. Volume changes of autogenous bone grafts after alveolar ridge augmentation of atrophic maxillae and mandibles. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2009; 38:10591065.
Phillips JH, Forrest CR, Gruss JS. Current concepts in the use of bone grafts in facial fractures. Basic science considerations. Clin Plast Surg 1992; 19:4158.
LaTrenta GS, McCarthy JG, Breitbart AS, et al. The role of rigid skeletal fixation in bone-graft augmentation of the craniofacial skeleton. Plast Reconstr Surg 1989; 84:578588.
Zhao YF, Lu P, Zhou XN, et al. Comparative study of onlay bone graft absorption of outer cortex from mandible and cranium. Chin J Plast Surg 2008; 24:303306.
Loeffler BJ, Kellam JF, Sims SH, et al. Prospective observational study of donor-site morbidity following anterior iliac crest bone-grafting in orthopaedic trauma reconstruction patients. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2012; 94:16491654.
Zhao YF, Gui L. Experimental study of biomechanics after mandibular outer cortex osteotomy [in Chinese]. Zhonghua Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi 2008; 43:111112.
Hsu YC, Li J, Hu J, et al. Correction of square jaw with low angles using mandibular “V-line” ostectomy combined with outer cortex ostectomy. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2010; 109:197202.
Li J, Hsu Y, Khadka A, et al. Surgical designs and techniques for mandibular contouring based on categorisation of square face with low gonial angle in orientals. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2012; 65:e1e8.
Yang J, Wang L, Xu H, et al. Mandibular oblique ostectomy: an alternative procedure to reduce the width of the lower face. J Craniofac Surg 2009; 20: (suppl 2): 18221826.
Li J, Hsu Y, Khadka A, et al. Contouring of a square jaw on a short face by narrowing and sliding genioplasty combined with mandibular outer cortex ostectomy in orientals. Plast Reconstr Surg 2011; 127:20832092.
Han K, Kim J. Reduction mandibuloplasty: ostectomy of the lateral cortex around the mandibular angle. J Craniofac Surg 2001; 12:314325.
Liu W, Zhang ZY, Tang XJ, et al. Effect of outer mandibular cortex osteotomy on local morphology and biomechanics in young miniature pigs. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 2011; 39:425430.
Gordon CR, Murphy RJ, Grant G, et al. Commentary on “a multicenter experience with image-guided surgical navigation: broadening clinical indications in complex craniomaxillofacial surgery”. J Craniofac Surg 2015; 26:11401142.
Zhong S, Huang GJ, Susarla SM, et al. Quantitative analysis of dual-purpose, patient-specific craniofacial implants for correction of temporal deformity. Neurosurgery 2015; 11:220229.