Related Experiment Video
Updated: Feb 22, 2026
An Improved Mechanical Testing Method to Assess Bone-implant Anchorage
Published on: February 10, 2014
CAD-CAM plates versus conventional fixation plates for primary mandibular reconstruction: A biomechanical in vitro
Carsten Rendenbach1, Kay Sellenschloh2, Lucca Gerbig3
1Department of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery (Head: Prof. Dr. med. Dr. med. dent. Max Heiland), Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of Health, Augustenburger Platz 1, 13353 Berlin, Germany.
Background:
CAD/CAM reconstruction plates have become a viable option for mandible reconstruction. The aim of this study was to determine whether CAD/CAM plates provide higher fatigue strength compared with conventional fixation systems.
Material And Methods:
1.0 mm miniplates, 2.0 mm conventional locking plates (DePuy Synthes, Umkirch, Germany), and 2.0 mm CAD/CAM plates (Materialise, Leuven, Belgium/DePuy Synthes) were used to reconstruct a polyurethane mandible model (Synbone, Malans, CH) with cortical and cancellous bone equivalents. Mastication was simulated via cyclic dynamic testing using a universal testing machine (MTS, Bionix, Eden Prairie, MN, USA) until material failure reached a rate of 1 Hz with increasing loads on the left side.
Results:
No significant difference was found between the groups until a load of 300 N. At higher loads, vertical displacement differed increasingly, with a poorer performance of miniplates (p = 0.04). Plate breakage occurred in miniplates and conventional locking plates. Screw breakage was recorded as the primary failure mechanism in CAD/CAM plates. Stiffness was significantly higher with the CAD/CAM plates (p = 0.04).
Conclusion:
CAD/CAM plates and reconstruction plates provide higher fatigue strength than miniplates, and stiffness is highest in CAD/CAM systems. All tested fixation methods seem sufficiently stable for mandible reconstruction.
