Mandibular Reconstruction Using Iliac Flap Based on Occlusion-Driven Workflow Transferred by Digital Surgical Guides.

PURPOSE: The current standard for mandibular reconstruction is a contour-based approach using a fibular flap offering good cosmetic results but challenging to reconstruct using dental implants. An iliac flap is more amenable to implant placement and better suited for occlusion-driven reconstruction. We aimed to describe an occlusion-driven workflow that involves the use of digital surgical guides to perform mandibular reconstruction using an iliac flap; we also aimed to compare our results to those we achieved with conventional contour-based reconstruction.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study. All patients who underwent mandibular reconstruction with an iliac flap at our university hospital between September 2017 and December 2019 were considered eligible for the study. The inclusion criteria included mandibular defects after tumor ablation and stable preoperative occlusal relationship. The exclusion criteria were as follows: defects involving the condyle and ramus, temporomandibular joint disease, and obvious preoperative nontumor-related facial asymmetry. To evaluate surgical outcomes, patients were assigned to 2 groups based on the implemented surgical workflow: the occlusion-driven and traditional contour-driven groups. The intermaxillary distance, intermaxillary angle, surface deviation, and implantation rates were compared between the 2 groups. The operating time, length, and number of iliac bone segments were recorded. Intergroup differences were investigated using an independent samples t test and Fisher exact test.

RESULTS

Overall, 24 patients were included (13 in the occlusion-driven group and 11 in the contour-driven group). Implantation rate was higher in the occlusion-driven group (61.5%) compared with the contour-driven group (18.2%; P = .047). The average acceptable intermaxillary distance was greater in the occlusion-driven group (92.3 ± 27.7%) than in the contour-driven group (47.0 ± 47.6%; P = .01). The average intermaxillary angle was 88.2 ± 8.4° in the occlusion-driven group and 76.4 ± 10.3° in the contour-driven group (P < .01).

CONCLUSIONS

Digital surgical guides can precisely transfer virtual surgical planning to real-world mandibular surgery. An occlusion-driven workflow might provide a better intermaxillary jaw relationship than traditional contour-driven surgical procedures, resulting in improved mastication.