Dataset Information

Randomized Clinical Trial of the Accuracy of Patient-Specific Implants versus CAD/CAM Splints in Orthognathic Surgery.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The maxilla position is essential for the aesthetic and functional outcomes of orthognathic surgery. Previous studies demonstrated the advantages of patient-specific implants in orthognathic surgery. However, more data are needed to confirm the superiority of patient-specific implants over surgical splints created with computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM). This randomized controlled trial aimed to compare the accuracy of patient-specific implants and CAD/CAM splints for maxilla repositioning in orthognathic surgery.

Methods

Patients (n = 64) who required orthognathic surgery were randomly assigned to use either patient-specific implants (patient-specific implant group) or CAD/CAM surgical splints (splint group) to reposition the maxilla. The outcome evaluation was completed by comparing virtual plans with actual results. The primary outcome was the discrepancies of the centroid position of the maxilla. Other translation and orientation discrepancies of the maxilla were also assessed.

Results

The authors analyzed 27 patients in the patient-specific implant group and 31 in the splint group. The maxilla position discrepancy was 1.41 ± 0.58 mm in the patient-specific implant group and 2.20 ± 0.94 mm in the splint group; the between-group difference was significant (p < 0.001). For the patient-specific implant group, the largest translation discrepancy was 1.02 ± 0.66 mm in the anteroposterior direction, and the largest orientation discrepancy was 1.85 ± 1.42 degrees in pitch. For the splint group, the largest translation discrepancy was 1.23 ± 0.93 mm in the mediolateral direction, and the largest orientation discrepancy was 1.72 ± 1.56 degrees in pitch.

Conclusion

The result showed that using patient-specific implants in orthognathic surgery resulted in a more accurate maxilla position than CAD/CAM surgical splints.

Clinical question/level of evidence

Therapeutic, I.

SUBMITTER: Li B

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8542074 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Randomized Clinical Trial of the Accuracy of Patient-Specific Implants versus CAD/CAM Splints in Orthognathic Surgery.

Li Biao B Wei Hongpu H Jiang Tengfei T Qian Yifeng Y Zhang Tianjia T Yu Hongbo H Zhang Lei L Wang Xudong X

Plastic and reconstructive surgery 20211101 5

<h4>Background</h4>The maxilla position is essential for the aesthetic and functional outcomes of orthognathic surgery. Previous studies demonstrated the advantages of patient-specific implants in orthognathic surgery. However, more data are needed to confirm the superiority of patient-specific implants over surgical splints created with computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM). This randomized controlled trial aimed to compare the accuracy of patient-specific implants and CA ...[more]

PMID: 34705785

Similar Datasets

Project description:The advancement of intraoral scanners has allowed for more efficient workflow in the dental clinical setting. However, limited data exist regarding the accuracy of the digital impressions produced with various scanner settings and scanning approaches. The purpose of this in vitro study was to compare the accuracy of digital impressions at the crown preparation margin using different scanning resolutions of a specific intraoral scanner system. An all-ceramic crown preparation of a mandibular first molar was constructed in a typodont, and a scan (n = 3) was created with an industrial-grade laboratory scanner (3Shape D2000) as the control. Digital impressions were obtained with an intraoral scanner (3Shape TRIOS 3) under three settings-high resolution (HR), standard resolution (SR), and combined resolution (SHR). Comparative 3D analysis of scans was performed with Geomagic Control X software to measure the discrepancy between intraoral scans and the control scan along the preparation finish line. The scan time and number of images captured per scan were recorded. Statistical analysis was performed by one-way ANOVA, two-way repeated measures ANOVA, Pearson's correlation, and Dunnett's T3 test (? = 0.05). Significant differences were observed for scan time and for number of images captured among scan resolution settings (? < 0.05). The scan time for the SR group was, on average, 34.2 s less than the SHR group and 46.5 s less than the HR group. For discrepancy on the finish line, no significant differences were observed among scanning resolutions (HR: 31.5 ± 5.5 ?m, SHR: 33.2 ± 3.7 ?m, SR: 33.6 ± 3.1 ?m). Significant differences in discrepancy were observed among tooth surfaces, with the distal surface showing the highest discrepancies. In conclusion, the resolution of the intra-oral scanner is primarily defined by the system hardware and optimized for default scans. A software high-resolution mode that obtains more data over a longer time may not necessarily benefit the scan accuracy, while the tooth preparation and surface parameters do affect the accuracy.

Project description:BackgroundRecognition of some of the limitations of titanium plates and screws used for the fixation of bones has led to the development of plates manufactured from bioresorbable materials. Whilst resorbable plates appear to offer clinical advantages over metal plates in orthognathic surgery, concerns remain about the stability of fixation and the length of time required for their degradation and the possibility of foreign body reactions. This review compares the use of titanium versus bioresorbable plates in orthognathic surgery and is an update of the Cochrane Review first published in 2007.ObjectivesTo compare the effects of bioresorbable fixation systems with titanium systems used during orthognathic surgery.Search methodsCochrane Oral Health's Information Specialist searched the following databases: Cochrane Oral Health's Trials Register (to 20 January 2017); the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2016, Issue 11) in the Cochrane Library (searched 20 January 2017); MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to 20 January 2017); and Embase Ovid (1980 to 20 January 2017). We searched the US National Institutes of Health Ongoing Trials Register ClinicalTrials.gov (clinicaltrials.gov; searched 20 January 2017), and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (searched 20 January 2017) for ongoing trials. No restrictions were placed on the language or date of publication when searching the electronic databases.Selection criteriaRandomised controlled trials comparing bioresorbable versus titanium fixation systems used for orthognathic surgery in adults.Data collection and analysisTwo review authors independently screened the results of the electronic searches, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of the included studies. We resolved disagreement by discussion. Clinical heterogeneity between the included trials precluded pooling of data, and only a descriptive summary is presented.Main resultsThis review included two trials, involving 103 participants, one comparing titanium with resorbable plates and screws and the other titanium with resorbable screws. Both studies were at high risk of bias and provided very limited data for the primary outcomes of this review. All participants in one trial suffered mild to moderate postoperative discomfort with no statistically significant difference between the two plating groups at different follow-up times. Mean scores of patient satisfaction were 7.43 to 8.63 (range 0 to 10) with no statistically significant difference between the two groups throughout follow-up. Adverse effects reported in one study were two plate exposures in each group occurring between the third and ninth months. Plate exposures occurred mainly in the posterior maxillary region, except for one titanium plate exposure in the mandibular premolar region. Known causes of infection were associated with loosened screws and wound dehiscence with no statistically significant difference in the infection rate between titanium (3/196), and resorbable (3/165) plates.Authors' conclusionsWe do not have sufficient evidence to determine if titanium plates or resorbable plates are superior for fixation of bones after orthognathic surgery. This review provides insufficient evidence to show any difference in postoperative pain and discomfort, level of patient satisfaction, plate exposure or infection for plate and screw fixation using either titanium or resorbable materials.

Dataset Information

Randomized Clinical Trial of the Accuracy of Patient-Specific Implants versus CAD/CAM Splints in Orthognathic Surgery.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Clinical question/level of evidence

Publications

Randomized Clinical Trial of the Accuracy of Patient-Specific Implants versus CAD/CAM Splints in Orthognathic Surgery.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets