Orbital implant placement using a computer-aided design and manufacturing (CAD/CAM) stereolithographic surgical template protocol

Exploring digital technologies used in the design and manufacture of craniofacial implant surgical guides: A scoping review

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

Unlike intraoral implants, digitally planned surgical templates used for guiding the ideal position of the craniofacial implants are not well established, and clear methods and guidelines for their design and construction are lacking.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this scoping review was to identify the publications that used a full or partial computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacture (CAD-CAM) protocol to create a surgical guide that achieves the correct positioning of craniofacial implants to retain a silicone facial prosthesis.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A systematic search was conducted in MEDLINE/PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Scopus for articles published before November 2021 in the English language. Articles needed to satisfy the eligibility criterion of in vivo articles that created a surgical guide with digital technology for inserting titanium craniofacial implants to hold a silicone facial prosthesis. Articles that inserted implants in the oral cavity or upper alveolus only and articles that did not describe the structure and retention of the surgical guide were excluded.

RESULTS

Ten articles were included in the review; all were clinical reports. Two of the articles used a CAD-only approach alongside a conventionally constructed surgical guide. Eight articles described applying a complete CAD-CAM protocol for the implant guides. The digital workflow varied considerably depending on the software program, design, and retention of guides. Only 1 report described a follow-up scanning protocol to verify the accuracy of the final implant positions compared with the planned positions.

CONCLUSIONS

Digitally designed surgical guides can be an excellent adjunct to accurately place titanium implants in the craniofacial skeleton for support of silicone prostheses. A sound protocol for the design and retention of the surgical guides will enhance the use and accuracy of craniofacial implants in prosthetic facial rehabilitation.

Main Applications and Recent Research Progresses of Additive Manufacturing in Dentistry

In recent ten years, with the fast development of digital and engineering manufacturing technology, additive manufacturing has already been more and more widely used in the field of dentistry, from the first personalized surgical guides to the latest personalized restoration crowns and root implants. In particular, the bioprinting of teeth and tissue is of great potential to realize organ regeneration and finally improve the life quality. In this review paper, we firstly presented the workflow of additive manufacturing technology. Then, we summarized the main applications and recent research progresses of additive manufacturing in dentistry. Lastly, we sketched out some challenges and future directions of additive manufacturing technology in dentistry.

Systematic Review of Clinical Applications of CAD/CAM Technology for Craniofacial Implants Placement and Manufacturing of Orbital Prostheses

This systematic review was aimed at gathering technical and clinical applications of CAD/CAM technology for the preoperative planning of craniofacial implants placement, designing of molds and substructures and fabrication of orbital prostheses. Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines, an electronic search was executed. Human studies that utilized digital planning systems for the prosthetic rehabilitation of orbital defects were included. A total of 16 studies of 30 clinical cases, which were virtually planned through various digital planning and designing software, were included. The most common preoperative data required for digital planning were CT scans in 15 cases, the 3DSS-STD-II scanning system in 5 cases, an Artec Color 3D scanner in 3 cases and a NextEngine Desktop 3D laser scanner in 2 cases. Meanwhile, the digital designing software were Ease Orbital Implant Planning EOIPlan software in eight cases, Geomagic software in eight cases, Simplant software in four cases and Artec Studio 12 Professional in three cases. Surgical templates were fabricated for 12 cases to place 41 craniofacial implants in the orbital defect area. An image-guided surgical navigation system was utilized for the placement of five orbital implants in two cases. Digital designing and printing systems were reported for the preoperative planning of craniofacial implants placement, designing of molds and substructures and fabrication of orbital prostheses. The studies concluded that the digital planning, designing and fabrication of orbital prostheses reduce the clinical and laboratory times, reduces patient visits and provide a satisfactory outcome; however, technical skills and equipment costs are posing limitations on the use of these digital systems.

Comparison of Nasoseptal Cartilage Graft Versus Titanium Mesh in Reconstruction of Pure Orbital Blowout Fractures

PURPOSE

To compare the efficacy of nasoseptal cartilage grafts versus titanium mesh implants in pure orbital blowout fractures.

METHODS

A retrospective review was performed on 48 patients who had surgical repair of an orbital fracture. Patients who underwent pure orbital blowout fracture repair with either nasoseptal cartilage grafts or titanium mesh implants and at least 1 year postoperative follow-up were included in the study. The clinical features and treatment outcomes were analyzed.

RESULTS

Twenty-five patients fulfilled our study criteria and were included in the analyses. Nasoseptal graft was used in 12 patients (48%) while titanium mesh was preferred in 13 patients (52%). Preoperative clinical features including age, size of the floor defect, and preoperative clinical findings (enophthalmos, diplopia, and restriction of ocular motility) were similar between 2 groups. Mean postoperative follow-up was 14.7 ± 2.3 months in the nasoseptal group while it was 16.1 ± 2.5 months in the titanium group (P = 0.84). Diplopia and ocular motility limitation were resolved in all patients at the last postoperative follow-up visit, while 1 patient in each group had enophthalmos (8.3% versus 7.6%, P = 1.0). No patient in the nasoseptal group experienced postoperative complications while 2 patients in the titanium group (15.3%) developed material-related complications (P = 0.48).

CONCLUSIONS

Long-term clinical results of nasoseptal cartilage grafts and titanium mesh implants in pure orbital blowout fractures with preoperative floor defects smaller than 4 cm2 were comparable. Nasoseptal cartilage grafts may be preferred in patients with septal deviation and no spurs or turbinate hypertrophy.

Implant prognosis in irradiated versus non-irradiated nasal, orbital and auricular sites

The purpose of this systematic review was to evaluate implant survival in irradiated nasal, auricular, orbital sites and to compare them with non-irradiated respective sites. Four electronic databases and seven related journals were searched until December and March 2018, respectively. A total of 7892 articles were identified, 18 of which were included in this review; one non-randomized clinical trial, two prospective cohort, eight retrospective cohort and seven cross-sectional studies. Using the ROBIN-I Cochrane tool for risk assessment, 13 studies were judged at serious, one at moderate and four at critical risk of bias. Thirteen were included in 18 meta-analyses, the results of which showed a significant difference between irradiated and non-irradiated sites, favouring non-irradiated with risk ratio (RR) = 0.93, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.89-0.97, P=0.001. Comparisons among nasal, auricular and orbital sites revealed no significant differences, whether in irradiated or non-irradiated patients at P<0.05. Hence, it was concluded that, within the limitations of this review, survival of craniofacial implants is negatively affected by radiotherapy, especially in orbital sites. Level of evidence is moderate. Therefore, further prospective cohort studies with calculated sample sizes, restricted or properly managed confounders and no deviations from intended interventions might produce different results.

Applications of three-dimensional printing in orbital diseases and disorders

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To comprehensively review the applications of advanced three-dimensional printing technology in the management of orbital abnormalities.

RECENT FINDINGS

Three-dimensional printing has added value in the preoperative planning and manufacturing of patient-specific implants and surgical guides in the reconstruction of orbital trauma, congenital defects and tumor resection. In view of the costs and time, it is reserved as strategy for large and complex craniofacial cases, in particular those including the bony contour. There is anecdotal evidence of a benefit of three-dimensional printing in the manufacturing of prostheses for the exenterated and anophthalmic socket, and in the fabrication of patient-specific boluses, applicators and shielding devices for orbital radiation therapy. In addition, three-dimensional printed healthy and diseased orbits as phantom tangible models may augment the teaching and learning process of orbital surgery.

SUMMARY

Three-dimensional printing allows precision treatment tailored to the unique orbital anatomy of the patient. Advancement in technology and further research are required to support its wider use in orbital clinical practice.

Frontal sinus augmentation: Preliminary results of a new approach in prosthetic orbital reconstruction

PURPOSE

Reliable application of endosseous implants for prosthetic facial reconstruction depends on the bone volume available at the defect site. Regarding the orbit, sufficient bone presentation in the medial superior orbital rim is limited due to the frontal sinus. The aim of this article is to report for the first time on the augmentation of the frontal sinus for gaining bone volume for supraorbital implant placement.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between 2007 and 2014, five patients with orbital exenteration were treated by frontal sinus augmentation using autogenous cancellous bone graft from the ilium. Extraoral implants for prosthetic orbit reconstruction were placed 4-7 months later. In advance, cadaver surgery was performed to prove the feasibility of the method. Surgical technique is described, and intraoperative images are provided.

RESULTS

The frontal sinus was successfully augmented in all five patients. No major complications related to the procedure were observed. A total of nine orbital implants were inserted in the augmented bone, thereof one sleeping implant. Six implants were restored prosthetically, two implants were lost at exposure. The observation period ranged from 6 to 97 months (mean: 52.8 months). Mean time for patient rehabilitation was 13 months. High patient satisfaction was achieved with the implant-retained orbital prosthesis.

CONCLUSION

The augmentation of the frontal sinus allows implant placement by providing sufficient bone volume in the medial supraorbital rim. Considering the surgical success of this method and patient satisfaction, this new approach is concluded to be a viable option in a unique subset of patients.

Prosthetic rehabilitation of resected orbit in a case of mucormycosis

The design of orbital prosthesis to rehabilitate patients with orbital exenteration depends on the underlying clinical condition, material chosen for prosthesis, method of retention of the prosthesis, and and preference of the patient. Rehabilitation of a patient with orbital exenteration due to mucormycosis has been described by fabricating a prosthesis that used polymethyl methacrylate (to fabricate a conformer) and silicone material (to fabricate prosthetic superstructure). The two-component prosthesis was designed to attain dual mechanical retention using an anatomic undercut (conformer) and manually created mechanical undercut (prosthetic superstructure). The objective was to maintain the biological health of the underlying postsurgical tissue, longevity of the prosthesis, optimal esthetics, and adequate retention.

Orbital implants: State-of-the-art review with emphasis on biomaterials and recent advances

In the treatment of severe oculo-orbital traumas, intraocular malignancies or other life-threatening conditions it is sometimes necessary to surgically remove the patient's diseased eye. Following the removal of the eye, an orbital implant is inserted into the anophthalmic socket in order to provide satisfactory volume replacement and restore the aesthetic appearance of a normal eye. Over the last decades, the implant design and the criteria of materials selection evolved from simple non-porous polymeric sphere to devices with more complex shape and functionalities for ensuring better clinical outcomes in the long-term. Polymeric and ceramic porous implants have gained prominence since their highly interconnected porous architecture allows them to act as a passive framework for fibrovascular in-growth offering reduced complication rates and the possibility of pegging to enhance the motility of the artificial eye. However, there are still drawbacks to these materials. Some critical aspects of today's orbital implants include the risk of migration and extrusion, postoperative infections and low motility transmitted to the aesthetic ocular prosthesis. Hence, the development of novel biomaterials with enhanced functionalities (e.g. angiogenesis, antibacterial effect, in situ mouldability) which enable an improved outcome of eye replacement is more than ever desirable and represents one of the most challenging topics of research in the field of ocular implants. This review summarizes the evolution of orbital implants and provides an overview of the most recent advances in the field as well as some critical remarks for materials design, selection, characterization and translation to clinical applications.