ObjectivesRadiolucent mandibular lesions seen on panoramic radiographs develop from both odontogenic and non-odontogenic structures. They represent a broad spectrum of lesions with a varying degree of malignant potential. The purpose of this review is to illustrate the characteristic imaging findings—as well as the clinical and histological features—of common and uncommon radiolucent lesions of the mandible.MethodsThis review article is based on the retrospective evaluation of 11,725 panoramic radiographs seen in our institution during the past 6 years. It provides a comprehensive, practical approach to the radiological interpretation of radiolucent lesions of the mandible. To facilitate the diagnostic approach, we have classified radiolucent lesions into two groups: lesions with well-defined borders and those with ill-defined borders.ResultsLesion prevalence, age of manifestation, location within the mandible, relationship to dental structures, effect on adjacent structures and characteristic findings at computed tomography (CT), cone beam CT (CBCT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) are discussed. Pitfalls including malignant lesions mimicking benign disease and pseudo-lesions are equally addressed.ConclusionKnowledge of the characteristic imaging features of radiolucent mandibular lesions narrows the differential diagnosis and is crucial for the identification of those lesions, where biopsy is indicated for definitive histology.Teaching points• Panoramic X-rays, CT and MRI are essential for the work-up of radiolucent mandibular lesions.• Lesion borders, location within the mandible, relationship to dental structures and tissue characteristics on cross-sectional imaging are indispensable to narrow the differential diagnosis.• High-resolution CT and CBCT play a major role for the assessment of lesion margins and their relationship to important anatomic structures, such as the inferior alveolar nerve.• Although most radiolucent lesions with well-defined sclerotic borders are benign, MRI may reveal clinically unsuspected malignant disease.

Cosmetic and functional reconstruction of large and complex calvarial defects remains a challenge for craniofacial surgeons. Computer-designed alloplastic implants have revolutionized the conceptualization and approach to these reconstructions and have become a reliable and irreplaceable part of the surgical armamentarium. We are reporting a case of complex orbito-fronto-temporal reconstruction using a computer-designed PEEK (polyetheretherketones)-Patient Specific Implant (PSI). To the best of our knowledge, no other similar cases regarding the use of these implants in cranial reconstruction have been reported previously.

The aim of this study was to systematically review literature reporting on the use of external distraction osteogenesis (DO) and internal DO in the treatment of severe maxillary hypoplasia in cleft and palate patients. Literature research has been performed using the PubMed database of the National Library of Medicine and National Institutes of Health from 1966 to August 2007. We used cleft lip and palate and distraction osteogenesis as key words. Of the 104 articles found, we only considered the Anglo-Saxon literature, which reported on the correction of the maxillary hypoplasia with DO techniques. A total of 32 studies reported on anteroposterior external DO (27 studies on rigid external device and 5 on face mask), 17 studies reported on anteroposterior internal DO, and 3 studies reported on transverse internal DO have been retained for this review. Despite the heterogeneity and methodological limitations of most of the studies, results showed that external DO with rigid external device and internal DO resulted to be a more reliable and accurate technique than the face mask in the management of severe maxillary hypoplasia in patients with cleft lip and palate. The current review demonstrated that external and internal DO in the treatment of severe maxillary hypoplasia in cleft and palate patients (1) is a reproducible and valuable alternative to standard orthognathic surgery procedures, (2) allows for a global improvement in facial aesthetic, (3) allows a maxillary correction in patients during the period of mixed dentition, and (4) allows either for an unchanged or better velopharyngeal function.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate retrospectively the use of ITI dental implants used for anchoring facial prostheses in the restorative treatment of midface defects. The authors analyzed the clinical data of 26 patients with orbital defects (n = 11), orbitonasal defects (n = 4), orbitonasomaxillary defects (n = 3), and nasal defects (n = 8). Data included age, sex, primary disease, implant position, implant length, implant failure, prosthetic attachment, radiation therapy, and peri-implant skin reactions. Follow-up was at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months and then on a yearly basis. The authors noted the status of healing and complications, if any. In total, 62 implants were placed as follows: 27 (43.5 percent) for orbital prostheses, 12 (19.4 percent) for orbitonasal prostheses, 14 (22.6 percent) for orbitonasomaxillary prostheses, and nine (14.5 percent) for nasal prostheses. Thirty-eight implants (61.3 percent) were placed in previously irradiated areas in 18 patients (69.2 percent). Mild skin reactions together with mild accumulation of sebaceous crusting around implants were recorded in 14.2 percent of the skin observations. No patient experienced severe inflammation requiring administration of systemic antibiotics or surgical revision. Implant success was 100 percent in both irradiated and nonirradiated patients. In conclusion, ITI dental implants result in a high rate of success in retaining midface prostheses and offer good stability and aesthetic satisfaction.

The purpose of the study was to compare the accuracy of computer-assisted surgery (CAS) and the traditional freehand technique for fibular free flap mandibular reconstruction as well as to evaluate the accuracy of the CAS planning. The medical records of 18 patients who underwent mandibular reconstruction with fibular free flap were reviewed. The CAS group (n = 7) benefited from virtual surgical planning and custom patient-specific plates and surgical cutting guides. The Control group (n = 11) was treated by conventional surgery. Morphometric comparison was done by calculating the differences in specific linear and angular parameters on pre- and postoperative CT-scans for both groups by using ProPlan CMF software. Symmetry was also assessed by calculating the ratio of the affected versus the nonaffected side. In the CAS group, planned and postoperative CT-scans were compared to evaluate accuracy. The morphometric comparison showed no statistically significant differences between the groups except for the axial angle on the nonaffected side (mean difference 1.0° in the CAS group versus 2.9° in the Control group; p = 0.03). Ratios of the affected side over the nonaffected side showed no differences between the two groups. In the CAS group, the accuracy assessment showed a mean distance deviation of 2.3 mm for mandibular osteotomies and 1.9 mm for fibular osteotomies. Our results indicated that CAS and the conventional freehand techniques were comparable in their ability to provide a satisfactory morphological fibular free flap mandibular reconstruction. Moreover, the accuracy of the CAS technique was within the range reported in the literature.

IntroductionTo evaluate the accuracy of CAD/CAM generated splints in orthognathic surgery by comparing planned versus actual post-operative 3D images.MethodsSpecific planning software (SimPlant® OMS Standalone 14.0) was used to perform a 3D virtual Le Fort I osteotomy in 10 fresh human cadaver heads. Stereolithographic splints were then generated and used during the surgical procedure to reposition the maxilla according to the planned position. Pre-operative planned and postoperative 3D CT scan images were fused and imported to dedicated software (MATLAB®) 7.11.) for calculating the translational and rotational (pitch, roll and yaw) differences between the two 3D images. Geometrical accuracy was estimated using the Root Mean Square Deviations (RMSD) and lower and upper limits of accuracy were computed using the Bland & Altman method, with 95 % confidence intervals around the limits. The accuracy cutoff was set at +/− 2 mm for translational and ≤ 4° for rotational measurements.ResultsOverall accuracy between the two 3D images was within the accuracy cutoff for all values except for the antero-posterior positioning of the maxilla (2.17 mm). The translational and rotational differences due to the splint were all within the accuracy cutoff. However, the width of the limits of agreement (range between lower and upper limits) showed that rotational differences could be particularly large.ConclusionThis study demonstrated that maxillary repositioning can be accurately approximated and thus predicted by specific computational planning and CAD/CAM generated splints in orthognathic surgery. Further study should focus on the risk factors for inaccurate prediction.

This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors at www.springer.com/00266.

No abstract