Vertical mandibular bone augmentation by the osteodistraction of the transplanted fibula free flap: A case series with long-term follow-up

Sass, T; Piffkò, József; Oberna, Ferenc

doi:10.1016/j.jcms.2021.06.014

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Free vascularized bone transfers today represent the technique of choice 4 . LLF and free iliac crest or scapula flaps are among the main options 14 . In the literature, the only studies found in sub-Saharan Africa on free flaps were carried out in Nigeria with limited series 15,16 .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mandibular Reconstruction Using a Free Fibula Flap in a Disadvantaged Environment

Ndiaye,

Bouaoud,

Touré

et al. 2024

PRRS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Mandibular reconstruction remains a real challenge for the maxillofacial surgeon. Reconstruction techniques have evolved considerably and currently the gold standard is the fibula free flap (LLF). In sub-Saharan Africa, this intervention is rarely practiced due to lack of human resources (few specialist practitioners practicing this type of intervention) and technical resources (equipment, under-medicalization of the population, difficult and expensive access to care). Furthermore, in low-and middle-income countries, certain maxillofacial pathologies are specific, such as giant mandibular ameloblastomas, benign tumors characterized by an often impressive volume responsible for facial deformities and functional impotence, in patients with poor oral hygiene. Surgical management of such tumors requires mandibular reconstruction to meet functional and aesthetic requirements. It is in this context that collaborative missions between the maxillofacial surgery services of the Pitié-

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mandibular Reconstruction Using a Free Fibula Flap in a Disadvantaged Environment

Ndiaye,

Bouaoud,

Touré

et al. 2024

PRRS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Even so, it should be recognized that the height of the middle of the fibula was only half of the height of the naive mandible, which could be solved in following ways. Double-barrel technique of the fibula in the primary surgery or vertical osteodistraction of the integrated fibula flap in the secondary surgery was also reliable but drove the surgeons to a complicated surgery scenario 17 , 18 . Sun et.al proposed a convenient free bone grafting method using nonvascularized fibula as an inlay graft to the lower border of the neomandible 19 .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Morphometric analysis of paired fibula and mandible for optimal fibular mandibular reconstruction in a Chinese population

Wang

Wan

et al. 2022

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To analyze the morphology of paired fibula and mandible aiming to choose optimal fibular segments for mandibular reconstruction in a Chinses population. A total of 118 cases of paired mandible and fibula was collected. All patients were received preoperative cone beam CT (CBCT) scans for mandibular evaluation and CT-angiographical (CTA) examination of the bilateral lower legs, respectively. The cross-sectional morphological differences between proximal (Side P), middle (Side M) and distal (Side D) segments of fibula and anterior, premolar and molar areas of mandible were compared. The most frequent cross-sectional shape at Side D, Side M and Side P portion of fibula was circular (75.4%), triangular (67.8%) and circular (49.2%), respectively. In anterior, premolar and molar areas of mandible, the most of the cross-section was s-shape (90.82%), straight (83.64%) and oblique (91.89%), respectively. The height and width of upper one third (W1) at Side M were significantly larger than those of Side D and Side P (p < 0.0001). There was significantly difference of width of lower one third (W2) among three groups (p < 0.0001). As for the height and widths of mandible, there was significant difference among anterior, premolar and molar regions (p < 0.0001). The rate of height between Side M of fibula and mandible (H (Side M/area)) was significantly larger than H (Side D/area) and H (Side P/area) (p < 0.01). The ratio of W1 between Side D of fibula and mandible (W1 (Side D/area)) was significantly larger than that of W1 (Side M/area) and W1 (side P/area) (p < 0.05). As for the ratio of W2 between fibula and mandible (W2 (plane/area)), there was significant difference among groups (p < 0.01). The distal and middle segments of fibula were suitable for reconstructing the anterior area of mandible and the proximal segment of fibula was more compatible with the premolar and molar areas of mandible.Clinical Relevance Presurgical morphometric analysis of paired fibula and mandible aids for optimal fibular-based mandibular reconstruction.

show abstract

Vertical mandibular bone augmentation by the osteodistraction of the transplanted fibula free flap: A case series with long-term follow-up

Cited by 2 publications

References 34 publications

Mandibular Reconstruction Using a Free Fibula Flap in a Disadvantaged Environment

Mandibular Reconstruction Using a Free Fibula Flap in a Disadvantaged Environment

Morphometric analysis of paired fibula and mandible for optimal fibular mandibular reconstruction in a Chinese population

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About