The Accuracy of In-house Personalized Surgical Cutting Guide for Segmental Mandibulectomy: A Proof of Concept In Vitro Study
Objectives: Recently, the new computer-assisted surgery workflow for segmental mandibulectomy and reconstruction has been developed. The aim of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of in-house personalized surgical cutting guides for osteotomy on the mandible prior to reconstruction in in vitro study.
Methods: Twenty mandibular stereolithography underwent segmental mandibulectomy using the personalized surgical cutting guides. The virtual surgical plans with randomly generated anatomical defects were developed, and personalized surgical cutting guides were created. The stereolithography of mandible and personalized surgical cutting guides were manufactured with the three-dimensional printer using fuse deposition modelling. The segmental mandibulectomy was carried out using the personalized surgical cutting guide. The accuracy of osteotomy was determined using the superimposition between virtual surgical simulation data and scanned images of postoperative stereolithography in software. The error of osteotomy was evaluated in terms of absolute angular and distance deviation.
Results: After superimposition, the mean absolute angulation deviation of osteotomy was 1.3835±0.2357 degrees (95%CI; 1.3081-1.4588) and the mean absolute distance deviation of osteotomy was 1.2975±0.2907 mm (95%CI; 1.2045-1.3904).
Conclusions: The in-house personalized surgical cutting guides provided acceptable accuracy and feasibility for osteotomy on mandible. Further investigation in terms of clinical benefits is needed.
1. Bagheri SC, Bell RB, Khan HA. Current therapy in oral and maxillofacial surgery. Philadelphia: Elsevier Saunders; 2012.
2. Kumar BP, Venkatesh V, Kumar KA, Yadav BY, Mohan SR. Mandibular Reconstruction: Overview. J Maxillofac Oral Surg. 2016;15(4):425-41.
3. Powcharoen W, Yang WF, Yan Li K, Zhu W, Su YX. Computer-assisted versus conventional freehand mandibular reconstruction with fibula free flap: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2019;144(6):1417-28.
4. Yang WF, Choi WS, Wong MC, Powcharoen W, Zhu WY, Tsoi JK, et al. Three-dimensionally printed patient-specific surgical plates increase accuracy of oncologic head and neck reconstruction versus conventional surgical plates: a comparative study. Ann Surg Oncol. 2021;28(1):363-75.
5. Boyd JB, Gullane PJ, Rotstein LE, Brown DH, Irish JC. Classification of mandibular defects. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1993;92(7):1266-75.
6. Donnez M, Ollivier M, Munier M, Berton P, Podgorski JP, Chabrand P, et al. Are three-dimensional patient-specific cutting guides for open wedge high tibial osteotomy accurate? an in vitro study. J Orthop Surg Res. 2018;13(1):171.
7. Koo TK, Li MY. A Guideline of selecting and reporting intraclass correlation coefficients for reliability research. J Chiropr Med. 2016;15(2):155-63.
8. May MM, Howe BM, O'Byrne TJ, Alexander AE, Morris JM, Moore EJ, et al. Short and long-term outcomes of three-dimensional printed surgical guides and virtual surgical planning versus conventional methods for fibula free flap reconstruction of the mandible: decreased nonunion and complication rates. Head Neck. 2021;43(8):2342-52.
9. Bouchet B, Raoul G, Julieron B, Wojcik T. Functional and morphologic outcomes of CAD/CAM-assisted versus conventional microvascular fibular free flap reconstruction of the mandible: a retrospective study of 25 cases. J Stomatol Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2018;119(6):455-60.
10. Dalband M, Badkoobeh A, Alam M, Motie P, Tabrizi R. Comparison of the outcome of free iliac bone graft and vascularized iliac bone graft in reconstruction of mandibular defects: a systematic review. J Maxillofac Oral Surg. 2024; 23(6):1371-8.
11. Sun Q, Zhu Z, Meng F, Zhao R, Li X, Long X, et al. Application of a modified osteotomy and positioning integrative template system (MOPITS) based on a truncatable reconstruction model in the precise mandibular reconstruction with fibula free flap: a pilot clinical study. BMC oral health.. 2023;23(1):842.
12. Numajiri T, Nakamura H, Sowa Y, Nishino K. Low-cost design and manufacturing of surgical guides for mandibular reconstruction using a fibula. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2016;4(7):e805.
13. Lim SH, Kim MK, Kang SH. Precision of fibula positioning guide in mandibular reconstruction with a fibula graft. Head Face Med. 2016;12:7. doi: 10.1186/s13005-016-0104-2.
14. Ter Braak TP, Brouwer de Koning SG, van Alphen MJA, van der Heijden F, Schreuder WH, van Veen RLP, et al. A surgical navigated cutting guide for mandibular osteotomies: accuracy and reproducibility of an image-guided mandibular osteotomy. Int J Comput Ass Rad. 2020;15(10):1719-25.
15. Van Baar GJC, Forouzanfar T, Liberton N, Winters HAH, Leusink FKJ. Accuracy of computer-assisted surgery in mandibular reconstruction: a systematic review. Oral Oncol. 2018;84:52-60.
16. Bernstein JM, Daly MJ, Chan H, Qiu J, Goldstein D, Muhanna N, et al. Accuracy and reproducibility of virtual cutting guides and 3D-navigation for osteotomies of the mandible and maxilla. PLOS one. 2017;12(3):e0173111.
17. George E, Liacouras P, Rybicki FJ, Mitsouras D. Measuring and establishing the accuracy and reproducibility of 3D printed medical models. Radiographics. 2017;37:1424–50.