DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.18203/2349-2902.isj20222069

Experience with virtual planning and stereolithographic models in plastic surgery

Jorge Gaviria-Pinzon, Giancarlo Ruiz, Maria Paula Garcia, Carlos David Gutierrez, Luis Eduardo Bermudez

Abstract


The use of stereolithographic models and virtual planning in plastic surgery have been used mainly in craniomaxillofacial reconstructions secondary to trauma, oncological reconstructions, orthognathic surgery and correction of craniofacial developmental anomalies of craniofacial development, among others, making surgical planning a less tedious process and reducing surgical time. In this article we present the experience using this technology in a referral center. Eight cases are exposed where the different applications of virtual planning and 3D models can be evidenced. Pre-op and post-op images are presented showing the similarity with the planning. We have implemented its use not only for facial trauma reconstructions with free flaps, but also for the correction of sequelae, correction of complex craniofacial abnormalities, oncological defects, and hand reconstructions. Our experience has been favorable since it allowed us to obtain satisfactory functional and predictable results and a reduced surgical time, especially in complex cases. If available, this technology should be considered as a useful tool to obtain predictable and reliable results.


Keywords


Stereolithographic model, Virtual planning, Plastic surgery, 3D model, Head reconstruction, Head trauma

Full Text:

PDF

References


Antony AK, Chen WF, Kolokythas A, Weimer KA, Cohen MN. Use of virtual surgery and stereolithography-guided osteotomy for mandibular reconstruction with the free fibula. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2011;128(5):1080-84.

Cunningham LL Jr, Madsen MJ, Peterson G. Stereolithographic modeling technology applied to tumor resection. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2005;63(6):873-8.

Maniskas S, Pourtaheri N, Chandler L, Lu X, Bruckman KC, Steinbacher DM. Conformity of the Virtual Surgical Plan to the Actual Result Comparing Five Craniofacial Procedure Types. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2021;147(4):915-24.

Ueda K, Kino H, Katayama M, Hirota Y. Simulation Surgery Using 3D 3-layer Models for Congenital Anomaly. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2020;8(8):e3072.

Mehera P, Miner J, D'innocenzo R, Nadershah M. Use of 3-D Stereolithographic Models in Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery. Journal of Maxillofacial and Oral Surgery. 2011;10(1): 6-13.

Miranda J, Barajas H, Miranda E. Efectividad del modelo estereolitográfico en cirugía predictiva craneomaxilofacial en el Hospital Regional «General Ignacio Zaragoza» del ISSSTE. Reporte de investigación. Revista mexicana de Cirugía Oral y Maxilofacial. 2014;10(2):57-64

Hsu SS, Gateno J, Bell RB. Accuracy of a computer-aided surgical simulation protocol for orthognathic surgery: a prospective multicenter study. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2013;71(1):128-142.

Maniskas S, Pourtaheri N, Chandler L, Lu X, Bruckman K, Steinbacher D. Conformity of the Virtual Surgical Plan to the Actual Result Comparing Five Craniofacial Procedure Types. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2021;147(4):915-24.

Fleury CM, Sayyed AA, Baker SB. Custom Plates in Orthognathic Surgery: A Single Surgeon's Experience and Learning Curve. J Craniofac Surg. 2022;10.1097/SCS.

Chang YM, Wei FC. Fibula Jaw-in-a-Day with Minimal Computer-Aided Design and Manufacturing: Maximizing Efficiency, Cost-Effectiveness, Intraoperative Flexibility, and Quality. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2021;147(2):476-9.