Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress 2023 EHA Congress 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Aesthetic Plastic Surgery
Published in: Aesthetic Plastic Surgery 1/2018

01-02-2018 | Original Article

Reconstruction of Mandibular Contour Using Individualized High-Density Porous Polyethylene (Medpor®) Implants Under the Guidance of Virtual Surgical Planning and 3D-Printed Surgical Templates

Authors: Yu Wang, Yiqun Zhang, Zhen Zhang, Xiang Li, Jianwei Pan, Jihua Li

Published in: Aesthetic Plastic Surgery | Issue 1/2018

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

The mandibular contour plays a significant role in the beautiful and youthful look but the reconstruction remains a challenging problem. The objective of this study was to evaluate the use of individualized high-density porous polyethylene (Medpor®) implants for comprehensive reconstruction of mandibular contour with the aid of computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM).

Methods

From 2010 to 2014, 12 patients with mandibular contour deformities were enrolled in our retrospective study. Mandible models and individualized surgical templates were fabricated by three-dimensional (3D) printing and Medpor® implants were made according to the surgical templates. The Medpor® implants were used for both unilateral and bilateral mandibular contour deformities. In four cases, simultaneous mandibular orthognathic surgery was performed with unilateral mandibular contour reconstruction.

Results

Eleven patients had a reposeful postoperative recovery with no complication. Delayed infection was shown in one patient and the Medpor® implant was removed. All the 11 patients had the mandibular contour reconstructed satisfactorily.

Conclusion

The technique and cases presented demonstrate the utility of Medpor® implants with CAD/CAM in comprehensive mandibular contour reconstruction.

Level of Evidence IV

This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.​springer.​com/​00266.
Literature
1.
Sevin K, Askar I, Saray A, Yormuk E (2000) Exposure of high-density porous polyethylene (medpor) used for contour restoration and treatment. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 38:44–49CrossRefPubMed
2.
3.
Patel K, Brandstetter K (2016) Solid implants in facial plastic surgery: potential complications and how to prevent them. Facial Plast Surg 32:520–531CrossRefPubMed
4.
Duman H, Deveci M, Uygur F, Sengezer M (1999) Reconstruction of contour and anterior wall defects of frontal bone with a porous polyethylene implant. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 27:298–301CrossRefPubMed
5.
Frodel JL, Lee S (1998) The use of high-density polyethylene implants in facial deformities. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 124:1219–1223CrossRefPubMed
6.
Niechajev I (2012) Facial reconstruction using porous high-density polyethylene (medpor): long-term results. Aesthet Plast Surg 36:917–927CrossRef
7.
Ye N, Long H, Zhu S, Yang Y, Lai W, Hu J (2015) The accuracy of computer image-guided template for mandibular angle ostectomy. Aesthet Plast Surg 39:117–123CrossRef
8.
Torroni A, Marianetti TM, Romandini M, Gasparini G, Cervelli D, Pelo S (2015) Mandibular reconstruction with different techniques. J Craniofac Surg 26:885–890CrossRefPubMed
9.
Staal F, Pluijmers B, Wolvius E, Koudstaal M (2016) Patient-specific implant for residual facial asymmetry following orthognathic surgery in unilateral craniofacial microsomia. Craniomaxillofac Trauma Reconstr 9:264–267CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
10.
Wang G, Li J, Khadka A, Hsu Y, Li W, Hu J (2012) CAD/CAM and rapid prototyped titanium for reconstruction of ramus defect and condylar fracture caused by mandibular reduction. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol 113:356–361CrossRefPubMed
11.
Lin J, Chen X (2012) Modified technique of chin augmentation with medpor for asian patients. Aesthet Surg J 32:799–803CrossRefPubMed
12.
Berghaus A, Stelter K (2006) Alloplastic materials in rhinoplasty. Curr Opin Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 14:270–277CrossRefPubMed
13.
Oliveira RV, de Souza Nunes LS, Filho HN, de Andrade Holgado L, Ribeiro DA, Matsumoto MA (2009) Fibrovascularization and osteogenesis in high-density porous polyethylene implants. J Craniofac Surg 20:1120–1124CrossRefPubMed
14.
Romo III T, Sclafani AP, Sabini P (1998) Use of porous high-density polyethylene in revision rhinoplasty and in the platyrrhine nose. Aesthet Plast Surg 22:211–221CrossRef
15.
Rai A, Datarkar A, Arora A, Adwani DG (2014) Utility of high density porous polyethylene implants in maxillofacial surgery. J Maxillofac Oral Surg 13:42–46CrossRefPubMed
16.
Ridwan-Pramana A, Wolff J, Raziei A, Ashton-James CE, Forouzanfar T (2015) Porous polyethylene implants in facial reconstruction: outcome and complications. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 43:1330–1334CrossRefPubMed
17.
Wang M, Liu W, Niu F, Qiu S, Liu X, Gui L (2012) Applying computer techniques in repairing mild mandibular asymmetry with high-density porous polyethylene. J Craniofac Surg 23:44–46CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Reconstruction of Mandibular Contour Using Individualized High-Density Porous Polyethylene (Medpor®) Implants Under the Guidance of Virtual Surgical Planning and 3D-Printed Surgical Templates
Authors
Yu Wang
Yiqun Zhang
Zhen Zhang
Xiang Li
Jianwei Pan
Jihua Li
Publication date
01-02-2018
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Aesthetic Plastic Surgery / Issue 1/2018
Print ISSN: 0364-216X
Electronic ISSN: 1432-5241
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-017-1029-2

Other articles of this Issue 1/2018

Aesthetic Plastic Surgery 1/2018 Go to the issue

Original Article

Expander/Implant Removal After Breast Reconstruction: Analysis of Risk Factors and Timeline

Letter to the Editor

Aesthetic Training for Plastic Surgeons: Are Residents Getting Enough?

Original Article

Comparison of Sensory Changes Following Superomedial and Inferior Pedicle Breast Reduction

Original Article

Autologous Buccal Micro-Mucosa Free Graft combined with Posterior Scrotal Flap Transfer for Vaginoplasty in Male-To-Female Transsexuals: A Pilot Study

Original Article

Abdominal Contouring Outcomes in Class III Obesity: Analysis of the ACS-NSQIP Database

Editor's Invited Commentary

Discussion: Augmentation mastopexy with a dermal encapsulated round or anatomic autoprosthesis