Comparing the use of conventional and three-dimensional printing (3DP) in mandibular reconstruction

Abstract

Background There are a number of clinical disorders that require mandibular reconstruction (MR). Novel three-dimensional (3D) printing technology enables reconstructions to be more accurate and beneficial to the patient. However, there is currently no evidence identifying which techniques are better suited for MR, based on the type of clinical disorder the patient has. In this study, we aim to compare 3D techniques with conventional techniques to identify how best to reconstruct the mandible based on the clinical cause that necessitates the reconstructive procedure: cancerous or benign tumours, clinical disorders, infection or disease and trauma or injury. Methods PubMed, Scopus, Embase and Medline were searched to identify relevant papers that outline the clinical differences between 3D and conventional techniques in MR. Data were evaluated to provide a clear outline of suitable techniques for surgery. Results 20 of 2749 papers met inclusion criteria. These papers were grouped based on the clinical causes that required MR into four categories: malignant or benign tumour resection; mandibular trauma/injury and other clinical disorders. Conclusions The majority of researchers favoured 3D techniques in MR. However, due to a lack of standardised reporting in these studies it was not possible to determine which specific techniques were better for which clinical presentations.

Efficiency of virtual surgical planning in management of maxillofacial trauma

“…In the present study, the actual OT after VSP was significantly lower than the expected time by traditional methods (p =0.008) which came in line with many previous studies [7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16] . The witnessed decrease in OT could be clarified by preoperative proper surgical planning of the exact PSI shape, size and site of osteotomies to be performed.…”

Polylactic Acid-Based In-house Three-Dimensional-Printed Intraoperative Surgical Model is a Time- and Cost-efficient Approach for Mandibular Reconstruction

“…Overall, the use of 3D printing was well known to significantly reduce complications by providing better precision. [12][13][14][15] By reducing the time needed for surgery, the operational costs of the surgery would also be suppressed, which will in turn benefit the hospital. 14,16 Kurlander et al and Latief pointed that 3D printing technology also helped to minimize operator mistakes during the operation up to 60%.…”

“…[12][13][14][15] By reducing the time needed for surgery, the operational costs of the surgery would also be suppressed, which will in turn benefit the hospital. 14,16 Kurlander et al and Latief pointed that 3D printing technology also helped to minimize operator mistakes during the operation up to 60%. 10,16 Our study used PLA filaments to create the templates for reconstruction guide.…”

“…Therefore, this material is also considered cost-effective. 14 We are one of the pioneers to claim that CAD/CAM technology is an affordable approach for mandibular reconstruction, incorporating in-house 3D printer and PLA-based 3D printing material. This technology should be widely implemented in reconstruction centers to improve intraoperative accuracy and postoperative outcomes while promoting economic benefits.…”

3D printed plates based on generative design biomechanically outperform manual digital fitting and conventional systems printed in photopolymers in bridging mandibular bone defects of critical size in dogs

“…3D printing is known to be an energy-efficient technology, both in terms of the manufacturing process and waste prevention. Some companies are already offering 3D printers on a lease basis, which allows clinics to take advantage of the latest advancements and reduce their costs in not having to purchase the 3D printing equipment ( 24 ) and can already be completed at an equal cost to conventional methods ( 25 ).…”