The Precision of Different Types of Plates Fabricated With a Computer-Aided Design and Manufacturing System in...

Computer-assisted surgery (CAS) has been introduced to mandible reconstruction with fibular-free flap in cutting guide placement. When CAS cooperates with different plate fixations, the results show various degrees of errors by which this study aimed to evaluate. Mock surgeries were conducted in 3D-printed mandibles with 2 types of defects, limited or extensive, reconstructed from 2 ameloblastoma patients. Three types of fixations, miniplate, manually bending reconstruction plate, and patient-specific plate, are tested, each of which was performed 3 times in each type of defect, adding up to 18 surgeries. One with the least errors was selected and applied to patients whose 3D-printed mandibles were derived. Finally, in vivo errors were compared with the mock. In limited defect, average errors show no statistical significance among all types. In extensive defect, patient-specific plate had a significantly lower average condylar error than manually bending reconstruction plate and miniplate (8.09±2.52 mm vs. 25.49±2.72 and 23.13±13.54 mm, respectively). When patient-specific plate was applied in vivo , the errors were not significantly different from the mock. Patient-specific plates that cooperated with CAS showed the least errors. Nevertheless, manually bent reconstruction plates and miniplates could be applied in limited defects with caution.