Biomechanical comparison of two ostectomy configurations for partial mandibulectomy

Abstract

Objective: To determine the stiffness and load to failure of two different ostectomy configurations using canine mandibles.

Study design: Cadaveric biomechanical assessment.

Animals: Paired mandibles (n = 30).

Methods: Standardized partial ostectomies were created on the alveolar surface of 30 mandibles. Samples were randomly assigned to right-angled (n = 15) or crescentic ostectomy (n = 15). Excision spanned the mesial aspect of the fourth premolar tooth to the distal aspect of first molar tooth. Mandibles were loaded to failure in three-point bending. The stiffness, displacement at maximum load, and load to failure were measured.

Results: There was no significant difference in stiffness (p = 0.59), displacement at maximum load (p = 0.16) and load to failure (p = 0.76) between right-angled or crescentic ostectomy. Right-angled and crescentic ostectomy failed mostly by fracture through an empty alveolus (11/15 and 13/15, respectively).

Clinical relevance: No significant differences in load to failure or stiffness between ostectomy techniques were observed. Crescentic ostectomy did not improve the acute load to failure for partial mandibulectomy. The empty alveolus served as a focal stress concentration point eliminating the potential mechanical advantage of a crescentic ostectomy.

Keywords: Oral surgery; canine; dog; oral tumour; rim mandibulectomy.