ADVANCED TECHNOLOGIES IN ORAL AND MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY

MaxillofacialSurgerydakapak

ADVANCEMENTS IN TISSUE ENGINEERING: TOWARDS PERSONALIZED MAXILLOFACIAL SOLUTIONS

Özgün Yıldırım

Health Sciences University, Gülhane Faculty of Dentistry, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Ankara, Türkiye

Yıldırım Ö. Advancements in Tissue Engineering: Towards Personalized Maxillofacial Solutions. Karasu HA, ed. Advanced Technologies in Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery. 1st ed. Ankara: Türkiye Klinikleri; 2025. p.7583.

ABSTRACT

The fourth industrial revolution took its place in history with the development of threedimensional (3D) printing technologies. Developments in this area have impacted oral and maxillofacial surgery applications as well as every branch of medicine. Designing and producing threedimensional objects, especially with computer support, have gained critical importance. Today, in oral and maxillofacial surgery, many custommade personalised preoperative structures are produced routinely by this new technology. The most important of these are titanium meshes, subperiosteal implants and reconstruc tion plates. When an implant is to be placed in the oral region, there may not be enough bone. Augmen tation may be required to provide sufficient bone content before dental implant placement. Titanium mesh has been used for augmentation purposes for many years. It is quite successful in vertical and horizontal bone augmentation procedures. There are, however, some disadvantages of using generic or nonpersonalised material. One of these is that the sharp and pointed edges formed when the titanium mesh is shaped may damage the soft tissue surrounding the titanium mesh and interfere with healing. Titanium meshes are quite popular especially in guided bone regeneration method and due to the advances in technology, custommade titanium meshes have been used recently to eliminate the disad vantage mentioned above. Subperiosteal implants can be offered as an alternative option in cases with advanced atrophic jawbones where augmentation is not performed due to patient request and physician preference. Subperiosteal implants has an even longer history, but the use of subperiosteal implants has been abandoned after the popularity of intraosseous implants increased. Advances in technology have enabled subperiosteal implants to be manufactured specifically for each individual. Today, personal ized subperiosteal implants can be designed on cone beam computed tomography images taken from patients and can be produced with threedimensional printing technologies. Very successful results have been reported in the literature. Finally, reconstruction plates are mentioned in this chapter. Various mandibular resections are performed in the treatment of deformities resulting from developmental dis orders in the jaws or in tumor surgeries. The adaptation of in vitro manufactured plates during surgery takes time and is challenging. In addition, their bending reduces the resistance of the material against fractures. For this reason, personalized reconstruction plates are also produced with threedimensional imaging and printing methods. In this way, the surgery time is shortened, the doctor has less difficulty and the fracture resistance of the material does not change.

Keywords: Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery; Titanium mesh; Subperiosteal implant; Reconstruction plate; Cone beam computed tomography; Threedimensional (3D) printing

Referanslar

  1. Watanabe Y, Dasher RB. On the progress of industrial revolutions: a model to account for the spread of artificial intelligence innovations across industry. Kindai Manag Rev. 2020;8:113-123. [Link]
  2. Xu M, David JM, Kim SH. The fourth industrial revolution: opportunities and challenges. Int J Finance Res. 2018;9(2):90-95. [Crossref]
  3. Prisecaru P. Challenges of the fourth industrial revolution. Knowl Horiz Econ. 2016;8(1):57-62. [Link]
  4. Khojasteh A, Ayoub AF, Nadjmi N. Emerging Technologies in Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery. In: Nokhbatolfoghahaei
  5. Farajpour H, Bastami F, Bohlouli M, Khojasteh A. Reconstruction of bilateral ramus-condyle unit defect using custom titanium prosthesis with preservation of both condyles. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2021;124:104765. [Crossref]  [PubMed]
  6. Khojasteh A, Bastami F, Alikhasi M. Implant-assisted orthognathic surgery. In: Integrated procedures in facial cosmetic surgery. Cham: Springer; 2021. p. 687-702. [Crossref]
  7. Khojasteh A, Ayoub AF, Nadjmi N. Emerging Technologies in Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery. In: Ahsaie MG. CBCT and MRI Data Acquisition as a Basis for Computer-Assisted Maxillofacial Treatments. 1st ed. Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd; 2023. p. 26-50. [Link]
  8. Majert BH, Metzger MC, Böhm J, Muecke T, Schulze D. Advanced imaging findings and computer-assisted surgery of suspected synovial chondromatosis in the temporomandibular joint. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2008;28(5):1251-1257. [Crossref]  [PubMed]
  9. Xie Y, Li S, Zhang T, Wang C, Xiaoxiao C. Titanium mesh for bone augmentation in oral implantology: current application and progress. International Journal of Oral Science. 2020;12(1):37. [Crossref]  [PubMed]  [PMC]
  10. Poli PP, Beretta M, Cicciù M, Maiorana C. Alveolar Ridge Augmentation with Titanium Mesh. A Retrospective Clinical Study. The Open Dentistry Journal. 2014;29(8):148-158. [Crossref]  [PubMed]  [PMC]
  11. Louis PJ, Gutta R, Naief NSA , Bartolucci AA. Reconstruction of the Maxilla and Mandible With Particulate Bone Graft and Titanium Mesh for Implant Placement. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2008;66(2):235-245. [Crossref]  [PubMed]
  12. Rakhmatia YD, Ayukawa Y, Furuhashi A, Koyano K. Current barrier membranes: Titanium mesh and other membranes for guided bone regeneration in dental applications. J Prosthodont Res. 2013;57(1):3-14. [Crossref]  [PubMed]
  13. Sagheb K, Schiegnitz E, Moergel M, Walter C, Nawas BA, Wagner W. Clinical outcome of alveolar ridge augmentation with individualized CAD-CAM-produced titanium mesh. Int J Implant Dent. 2017;3(1):36. [Crossref]  [PubMed]  [PMC]
  14. Torres J, Tamimi F, Alkhraisat MH, Manchon A, Linares R, Prados-Frutos JC, et al. Platelet-rich plasma may prevent titanium-mesh exposure in alveolar ridge augmentation with anorganic bovine bone. J Clin Periodontol 2010;37(10):943-951. [Crossref]  [PubMed]
  15. Sumida T, Otawa N, Kamata YU, Kamakura S, Mtsushita T, Kitagak H, et al. Custom-made titanium devices as membranes for bone augmentation in implant treatment: Clinical application and the comparison with conventional titanium mesh. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2015;43(10): 2183-2188. [Crossref]  [PubMed]
  16. Cucchi A, Giavatto MA, Giannatiempo J, Lizio G, Corinaldesi G. Custom-Made Titanium Mesh for Maxillary Bone Augmentation With Immediate Implants and Delayed Loading. J of Oral Impl. 2018;45(1):59-64. [Crossref]  [PubMed]
  17. Cruz N, Martins MI, Santos JD, Mur JG, Tondela JP. Surface Comparison of Three Different Commercial Custom-Made Titanium Meshes Produced by SLM for Dental Applications. Materials 2020;13(9):2177. [Crossref]  [PubMed]  [PMC]
  18. Lee WB, Choi WH, Lee HG, Choi NR, Hwang DS, Kim UK. Mandibular reconstruction with a ready-made type and a custom-made type titanium mesh after mandibular resection in patients with oral cancer. Maxillofac Plast Reconstr Surg. 2018;40(1):35. [Crossref]  [PubMed]  [PMC]
  19. El-Sawy MA, Hegazy SA. Subperiosteal implants constructed with digital technology: A systematic review. Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2024;28(3):1063-1075. [Crossref]  [PubMed]
  20. Schou S, Pallesen L, Hjørting-Hansen E, Pedersen CS, Fibæk B. A 41- year history of a mandibular subperiosteal implant. Clin Oral Impl Res 2000;11(2):171-178. [Crossref]  [PubMed]
  21. Dimitroulis G, Gupta B, Wilson I, Hart C. The atrophic edentulous alveolus. A preliminary study on a new generation of subperiosteal implants. Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2023;27(1):69-78. [Crossref]  [PubMed]
  22. Minichetti JC. Analysis of HA-coated Subperiosteal Implants. J Oral Implantol. 2003;29(3):111-116. [Crossref]  [PubMed]
  23. Anitua E, Eguia A, Staudig C, Alkhraisat MH. Clinical performance of additively manufactured subperiosteal implants: a systematic review. Inter J of Implant Dent. 2024;10:4. [Crossref]  [PubMed]  [PMC]
  24. Sirbu I. Subperiosteal implant technology: report from Rumania. J Oral Implantol. 2003;29(4):189-94. [Crossref]  [PubMed]
  25. Herce-López J, Pingarrón MC, Tofé-Povedano A, García-Arana L, Espino-Segura-Illa M, Sieira-Gil R, et al. Customized Subperiosteal Implants for the Rehabilitation of Atrophic Jaws: A Consensus Report and Literature Review. Biomimetics 2024:9;61. [Crossref]  [PubMed]  [PMC]
  26. Nguyen TM, Caruhel JB, Khonsari RH. A subperiosteal maxillary implant causing severe osteolysis. J Stomatol Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2018;119(6):523-525. J Stomatol Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2018;119(6):523-525. [Crossref]  [PubMed]
  27. Cerea M, Dolcini GA. Custom-Made Direct Metal Laser Sintering Titanium Subperiosteal Implants: A Retrospective Clinical Study on 70 Patients. Biomed Res Int. 2018 May 28:2018:5420391. [Crossref]  [PubMed]  [PMC]
  28. El-Sawy MA, ELgamal ME, Ahmed WM, EL-daker MA, Hegazy SA. Polyetheretherketone subperiosteal implant retaining a maxillary fixed prosthesis: A case series. J Prosthet Dent. 2024;132(3):562-569. [Crossref]  [PubMed]
  29. Peng TY, Shih YH, Hsia SM, Wang TH, Li PJ, Lin DJ, et al. In vitro assessment of the cell metabolic activity, cytotoxicity, cell attachment, and inflammatory reaction of human oral fibroblasts on polyetheretherketone (PEEK) implant-abutment. Polymers 2021;13:2995. [Crossref]  [PubMed]  [PMC]
  30. Al-Ahmari A, Nasr EA, Moiduddin K, Anwar S, Kindi MA, Kamrani A. A comparative study on the customized design of mandibular reconstruction plates using finite element method. Advances in Mechanical Engineering. 2015;7(7):1-11. [Crossref]
  31. Moiduddin K, Anwar S, Ahmed N, Ashfaq M, Al-Ahmari A. Computer Assisted Design and Analysis of Customized Porous Plate for Mandibular Reconstruction. IRBM 2017;38(2):78-89. [Crossref]
  32. Peacock ZS, Afshar S, Lukas SJ, Kaban LB. Customized Repair of Fractured Mandibular Reconstruction Plates. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2012;70(10):563-573. [Crossref]  [PubMed]
  33. Li P, Tang Y, Li J, Shen L, Tian W. Tang W. Establishment of sequential software processing for a biomechanical model of mandibular reconstruction with custom-made plate. Comput Methods Programs Biomed. 2013;111(3):642-649. [Crossref]  [PubMed]
  34. Lee ZH, Alfonso AR, Ramly EP, Kantar RS, Yu JW, Daar D, et al. The Latest Evolution in Virtual Surgical Planning: Customized Reconstruction Plates in Free Fibula Flap Mandibular Reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2020;146(4):872-879. [Crossref]  [PubMed]