Journal of cranio-maxillo-facial surgery : official publication of the European Association for Cranio-Maxillo-Facial Surgery · 2023
A novel alloplastic grid reconstruction plate for the mandible - Retrospective comparative clinical analysis of failure rates and specific complications.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Gielisch Matthias W, Siegberg Fabia, Thiem Daniel G E, Blatt Sebastian, Heimes Diana, Kämmerer Peer W
Аннотация
PURPOSE: This study aimed to investigate the effect of three different osteosynthesis plate systems on failure rates and complications after continuity-interrupting mandibular resections with alloplastic reconstructions.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Records of respective patients from 2010 to 2020 were analyzed retrospectively. The analyses included the osteosynthesis plate type (2.4 MANDIBULAR (RP1: MANDIBULAR [Medicon®, Tuttlingen, Germany]; RP2: Modus® Reco 2.5 [Medartis®, Basel, Switzerland]; and RP3: Modus 2 Mandible [Medartis®, Basel, Switzerland]), extent & location of the defect, age, sex, radiotherapy, and nicotine abuse. In case of failure, timepoint, and the problem, namely oral/extraoral dehiscence, screw loosening, and plate fractures that led to removal, were analyzed. Complications were classified according to Clavien-Dindo system.
RESULTS: A total of 136 patients were included. The mean follow-up time was 18 ± 26 months. Survival rates after 1, 2, and 5 years were 69.9%, 66.9%, and 64.7%, respectively. Although survival was not significantly associated with the reconstruction system, the most frequent complications were seen in cases of RP1 & RP2 when compared to RP3 (p = 0.033). In brief, dehiscences were seen significantly less often in cases of RP3 (12.5%) when compared to RP1 (44.7%) and RP2 (26.9%; p = 0.024). Fractures of the osteosynthesis systems occurred in 3 of 4 cases (75%) with RP1, in 1 of 4 cases (25%) using RP2, and in no single case using the RP3 system (p = 0.03). Most of the observed complications occurred up to 12 months postoperatively. A total plate survival rate of 64.7% and a total plate complication rate of 47.8% were seen.
CONCLUSION: In conclusion, it seems that RP3 should be preferred over RP1 and RP2 regarding failure rates and complications.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Records of respective patients from 2010 to 2020 were analyzed retrospectively. The analyses included the osteosynthesis plate type (2.4 MANDIBULAR (RP1: MANDIBULAR [Medicon®, Tuttlingen, Germany]; RP2: Modus® Reco 2.5 [Medartis®, Basel, Switzerland]; and RP3: Modus 2 Mandible [Medartis®, Basel, Switzerland]), extent & location of the defect, age, sex, radiotherapy, and nicotine abuse. In case of failure, timepoint, and the problem, namely oral/extraoral dehiscence, screw loosening, and plate fractures that led to removal, were analyzed. Complications were classified according to Clavien-Dindo system.
RESULTS: A total of 136 patients were included. The mean follow-up time was 18 ± 26 months. Survival rates after 1, 2, and 5 years were 69.9%, 66.9%, and 64.7%, respectively. Although survival was not significantly associated with the reconstruction system, the most frequent complications were seen in cases of RP1 & RP2 when compared to RP3 (p = 0.033). In brief, dehiscences were seen significantly less often in cases of RP3 (12.5%) when compared to RP1 (44.7%) and RP2 (26.9%; p = 0.024). Fractures of the osteosynthesis systems occurred in 3 of 4 cases (75%) with RP1, in 1 of 4 cases (25%) using RP2, and in no single case using the RP3 system (p = 0.03). Most of the observed complications occurred up to 12 months postoperatively. A total plate survival rate of 64.7% and a total plate complication rate of 47.8% were seen.
CONCLUSION: In conclusion, it seems that RP3 should be preferred over RP1 and RP2 regarding failure rates and complications.