State Key Laboratory of Oral & Maxillofacial Reconstruction and Regeneration, Key Laboratory of Oral Biomedicine Ministry of Education, Hubei Key Laboratory of Stomatology, School & Hospital of Stomatology, Wuhan University, Wuhan, China.
Department of Oral and Maxillofacial-Head and Neck Oncology, School of Stomatology, Hospital of Stomatology, Wuhan University, Wuhan, China.
Clin Oral Investig. 2024 Oct 10;28(11):585. doi: 10.1007/s00784-024-05985-9.
Given the increasing demand for precise and reliable reconstructive techniques in maxillofacial surgery, we try to offer valuable insights for clinicians in selecting optimal fixation methods.
Patients were categorized into miniplate and reconstruction plate groups for accuracy and bone healing comparison. We measured gonial angle, intercondylar, intergonial and anterior-posterior distance for general accuracy and distance of segmental endpoint to the sagittal plane for partial accuracy. The bone healing rate of the two groups was compared with CT images at 3, 6 and 12 months after operation.
Considering directional indicators, the miniplate group exhibited a wider intercondylar distance than the reconstruction plate group (p = 0.029). At 6 months postoperatively, the miniplate group demonstrated a higher bone healing rate compared to the reconstruction plate group, with no significant differences at other time points.
Over a nearly 5-year review, mandibular reconstruction with vascularized iliac bone flaps showed that reconstruction plates better maintained condylar position accuracy, while miniplates had superior bone healing rates at 6 months. No significant differences were found in other accuracy indices between the two plates.
Clinicians' selection of fixation plates frequently depends on personal preference rather than evidence-based criteria. This study compares the precision and postoperative osseous healing outcomes of miniplates and reconstruction plates to provide a more scientifically grounded basis for clinical decision-making.
鉴于颌面外科对精确可靠的重建技术的需求不断增加,我们试图为临床医生选择最佳固定方法提供有价值的见解。
将患者分为微型板组和重建板组,以进行准确性和骨愈合比较。我们测量了下颌角、髁间、下颌角间和前后距离以评估整体准确性,以及节段终点到矢状面的距离以评估部分准确性。术后 3、6 和 12 个月,通过 CT 图像比较两组的骨愈合率。
考虑到方向指标,微型板组的髁间距离比重建板组宽(p=0.029)。术后 6 个月,微型板组的骨愈合率高于重建板组,而在其他时间点无显著差异。
在近 5 年的回顾中,带血管髂骨瓣下颌骨重建显示重建板更好地保持了髁突位置的准确性,而微型板在术后 6 个月时具有更高的骨愈合率。两种钢板在其他准确性指标上无显著差异。
临床医生固定钢板的选择常常取决于个人偏好而非基于证据的标准。本研究比较了微型板和重建板的精度和术后骨愈合结果,为临床决策提供了更具科学依据的基础。