Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2014 Jan;4(1):9-18.
doi: 10.4103/2231-0746.133065.

3D modeling, custom implants and its future perspectives in craniofacial surgery

Jayanthi Parthasarathy  1
Affiliations
Review

3D modeling, custom implants and its future perspectives in craniofacial surgery

Jayanthi Parthasarathy. Ann Maxillofac Surg. 2014 Jan.

Abstract

Custom implants for the reconstruction of craniofacial defects have gained importance due to better performance over their generic counterparts. This is due to the precise adaptation to the region of implantation, reduced surgical times and better cosmesis. Application of 3D modeling in craniofacial surgery is changing the way surgeons are planning surgeries and graphic designers are designing custom implants. Advances in manufacturing processes and ushering of additive manufacturing for direct production of implants has eliminated the constraints of shape, size and internal structure and mechanical properties making it possible for the fabrication of implants that conform to the physical and mechanical requirements of the region of implantation. This article will review recent trends in 3D modeling and custom implants in craniofacial reconstruction.

Keywords: 3D modeling; CAD CAM implants; CAD CAM surgery; PEEK implants; additive manufacturing; craniofacial surgery; custom implants; electron beam melting; implants; patient specific implants; porous titanium.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of Interest: None declared.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Process flow for design and manufacture of computer assisted design/computer assisted manufacturing generated implants
Figure 2
Figure 2
(a) Titanium mesh implant fitted to the cranium model, (b) Intraoperative fixation of implant
Figure 3
Figure 3
(a) Patient specific porous titanium implant made using electron beam melting, (b) Implant fitting to the cranium model, (c) Intraoperative fixation of implant
Figure 4
Figure 4
Porous resin and hydroxyapatite implant manufactured by stereolithography
Figure 5
Figure 5
(a) Machined polyetheretherketone implant, (b) Intraoperative fixation to the cranium, (c) Postoperative X-ray imaging
Figure 6
Figure 6
Virtual surgical planning and manufacturing of the guides for mandible reconstruction
Figure 7
Figure 7
(a-e) Process plan for virtual surgical planning for fibula reconstruction of mandible (f) Fibula guide fitting to fibula bone model and (g) post op reconstructed mandible bone mode
Figure 8
Figure 8
3D printed titanium mandible implant
Figure 9
Figure 9
3D reconstruction of a mandible tumor and arch form reconstruction for adaptation of titanium mesh as graft space holder
Figure 10
Figure 10
3D reconstruction of a maxillary bone and arch form reconstruction for adaptation of titanium mesh as graft space holder
Figure 11
Figure 11
Maxillary defect reconstruction and the use of a titanium mesh as a temporary space holder for the graft[59]
Figure 12
Figure 12
(a and b) Midface reconstruction plan with fibula graft, (c) Dental implants placement in the fibula flap
Figure 13
Figure 13
(a) Reconstructed blown out maxillary fracture, (b) Repositioning and fixation of some of the large bone segments, (c) Intraoperative fixation of polyetheretherketone implant
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Shimko DA, Nauman EA. Development and characterization of a porous poly (methyl methacrylate) scaffold with controllable modulus and permeability. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater. 2007;80:360–9. - PubMed
    1. Schlickewei W, Schlickewei C. The use of bone substitutes in the treatment of bone defects-The clinical view and history. Macromol Symp. 2007;253:10–23.
    1. Lane JM, Sandhu HS. Current approaches to experimental bone grafting. Orthop Clin North Am. 1987;18:213–25. - PubMed
    1. St John TA, Vaccaro AR, Sah AP, Schaefer M, Berta SC, Albert T, et al. Physical and monetary costs associated with autogenous bone graft harvesting. Am J Orthop (Belle Mead NJ) 2003;32:18–23. - PubMed
    1. Silber JS, Anderson DG, Daffner SD, Brislin BT, Leland JM, Hilibrand AS, et al. Donor site morbidity after anterior iliac crest bone harvest for single-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2003;28:134–9. - PubMed