The change of mandibular morphology and its influencing factors in image-guided mandibular reconstruction surgery

张誉,梁节,单小峰,张雷,蔡志刚
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.cn441206-20191106-00352
2020-01-01
Abstract:Objective:To study the change of mandibular morphology in image navigation guided mandibular reconstruction surgery and the influence of the methods for mandibular defect location and registration.Methods:Forty-one cases were included from August, 2011 to October, 2019. Specific anatomical landmarks were marked on the preoperative and postoperative 3D CT images, and the morphological changes of navigation-assisted mandibular reconstruction were recorded. Different groups were divided according to the reconstruction side and the non-reconstruction side of the mandible, whether the defect included the condyle and the registration method, then the 3D morphological changes of the mandible were compared, and the influencing factors were studied. Data was analyzed by independent t-test, and the difference was considered as statistically significant if P<0.05. Results:The mean value of 3D morphological changes of mandible ranged from 1.710 to 4.977 mm. When the condyle was involved in the mandibular defect, the change of 3D morphology [(1.671-5.587) mm] was greater than that when the condyle was not involved in a defect [(1.346-4.358) mm]. The difference of width of mandibular angle and medial distance and lateral distance of condyle was statistically significant ( P<0.05). In the navigation-assisted mandibular reconstruction, the accuracy of mandibular condyle and the length of mandible on non-reconstructed side in the group of bone-implanted fiducial marker registration was better than that in the surface registration ( P<0.05), and there was no significant statistical difference in other indexes. Conclusion:The image navigation guided mandibular reconstruction surgery can accurately restore the 3D configuration of mandible. When the mandibular defect involving condylar can significantly reduce the mandibular reconstruction accuracy, the fiducial maker registration is superior to the surface registration in the reconstruction of mandibular condyle.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?