颌骨内异物取出术的手术导板设计和应用

毛梦芸 王成泽 朱海华 樊明星 吴笑妃 朱赴东

解剖学报 ›› 2023, Vol. 54 ›› Issue (2) : 244-248.

PDF(9669 KB)
欢迎访问《解剖学报》官方网站!今天是 English
PDF(9669 KB)
解剖学报 ›› 2023, Vol. 54 ›› Issue (2) : 244-248. DOI: 10.16098/j.issn.0529-1356.2023.02.018
技术方法

颌骨内异物取出术的手术导板设计和应用

  • 毛梦芸1 王成泽1 朱海华1 樊明星2 吴笑妃3 朱赴东1* 
作者信息 +

Design and validation of a surgical guide for the retrieval of foreign body instruments in jaw

  • MAO  Meng-yun1  WANG Cheng-ze 1  ZHU  Hai-hua1  FAN  Ming-xing2  WU  Xiao-fei3  ZHU  Fu-dong1* 
Author information +
文章历史 +

摘要

目的 设计一款辅助颌骨内异物取出术的新型手术导板,并进行体外模型评估和临床验证。   方法  基于锥形束计算机断层扫描数据和环钻技术,自主设计颌骨内异物取出术的外科手术导板,通过体外羊下颌骨模型评估该导板的可行性和准确性,并将其成功应用于临床病例。通过在柱状骨的六角和顶点处测量7个参数(cdh、cda、hdh、hda、vdh、vda和ad)距离,计算轴偏移角,评估实际去除和计划去除圆柱状骨之间的线性和角度偏差。   结果  体外模型显示该导板的六角和顶点的平均中心偏差分别为(0.51±0.14) mm和(0.62±0.19) mm。六角处的水平偏差为(0.48±0.16) mm,顶点处的水平偏差为(0.52±0.22) mm,六角处的垂直偏差为(0.17±0.09) mm,顶点处的垂直偏差为(0.29±0.13) mm,角度偏差为(5.38±3.43)°;在临床病例中,术者在导板帮助下,成功定位并取出了颌骨内断裂的根管锉。   结论  本款新型手术导板能够有效辅助目标性定位和微创性取出颌骨内断裂器械等异物。 

Abstract

Objective  To design and validate a novel surgical guide for retrieval of foreign body in jaw.     Methods Firstly, a surgical guide based on cone beam computed tomography and trephine technique was designed to remove broken dental instrument fragments. Its feasibility and accuracy were assessed by removing broken dental instrument in goat mandible, and then it was successfully applied in clinical cases. The linear and angular discrepancies between actual and planned columnar bone with imaginary fragment was analyzed. The euclidean distance was measured at the hex and apex of the columnar bone and the angle of axis deviation was also calculated. We obtained seven parameters (cdh, cda, hdh, hda, vdh, vda, and ad) to describe deviations.    Results  Mean central deviation at the hex and apex was (0.51 ± 0.14) mm and (0.62 ± 0.19) mm, respectively. Accompanying mean values were as follow: horizontal deviation at the hex was (0.48 ± 0.16) mm, horizontal deviation at the apex was (0.52 ± 0.22) mm, vertical deviation at the hex was (0.17 ± 0.09) mm, vertical deviation at the apex was (0.29 ± 0.13) mm, and angular deviation of (5.38 ± 3.43) degrees. In a clinical case, the guide successfully located and removed the fracture file.    Conclusion  This study reveals that this kind novel surgical guide could aid to locate and remove the foreign body in jaw. 

关键词

 手术导板 / 下颌骨异物 / 锥形束计算机断层扫描 /

Key words

Surgical guide / Foreign body in mandible / Cone-beam computed tomography / Goat

引用本文

导出引用
毛梦芸 王成泽 朱海华 樊明星 吴笑妃 朱赴东. 颌骨内异物取出术的手术导板设计和应用[J]. 解剖学报. 2023, 54(2): 244-248 https://doi.org/10.16098/j.issn.0529-1356.2023.02.018
MAO Meng-yun WANG Cheng-ze ZHU Hai-hua FAN Ming-xing WU Xiao-fei ZHU Fu-dong. Design and validation of a surgical guide for the retrieval of foreign body instruments in jaw[J]. Acta Anatomica Sinica. 2023, 54(2): 244-248 https://doi.org/10.16098/j.issn.0529-1356.2023.02.018
中图分类号: R782.05   

参考文献

 [1]Satheesh  SL, Jain S, Bhuyan AC, et al. Surgical management of a separated endodontic instrument using second generation platelet concentrate and hydroxyapatite[J]. J Clin Diagn Res, 2017, 11 (6):ZD01-ZD03.
 [2]Silva  TCG, Maranh?o Filho AWA, Alencar MGM, et al. Vasconcelos, mandibular fracture after third molar removal: a case repor[J] Gen Dent,  2019,67(4):e7-e10.
 [3]Manikandhan  R, Anantanarayanan P, Mathew PC, et al. Incidence and consequences of bur breakage in orthognathic surgery: a retrospective study with discussion of 2 interesting clinical situations[J]. J Oral Maxillofac Surg, 2011, 69 (9):2442-2447.
 [4]Nwashindi  A, Dim EM. Adverse effects of nickel in transosseous wires and surgical implants: literature review[J]. Niger J Med, 2014, 23 (4) 335-343.
 [5]Matsuda  S, Yoshimura H, Yoshida H, et al. Breakage and migration of a high-speed dental hand-piece bur during mandibular third molar extraction: two case reports[J]. Medicine, 2020, 99 (7) e19177.
 [6]Chybicki  D, Lipczyńska-Lewandowska M, Torbicka G, et al.Computer-controlled local anesthesia complication: surgical retrieval of a broken dental needle in noncooperative autistic paediatric patient[J].Case Rep Dent, 2020,2020:6686736.
 [7]D’Haese  J, Ackhurst J, Wismeijer D, et al. Current state of the art of computer-guided implant surgery[J]. Periodontol 2000, 2017,73 (1) :121-133.
 [8]Unsal  GS, Turkyilmaz I, Lakhia S. Advantages and limitations of implant surgery with CAD/CAM surgical guides: a literature review[J].J Clin Exp Dent, 2020,12 (4) :e409-e417.
 [9]Winnen  RG, Kniha K, Modabber A, et al. Reversal of osseointegration as a novel perspective for the removal of failed dental implants: a review of five patented methods[J].Materials (Basel), 2021,14 (24):7829.
 [10]Xu  LW, You J, Zhang JX, et al. Impact of surgical template on the accuracy of implant placement[J].J Prosthodont, 2016,25 (8): 641-646.
 [11]Sukegawa  S, Yoneda S, Kanno T, et al. Optical surgical navigation-assisted removal of a foreign body using a splint to simplify the registration process: a case report[J]. J Med Case Rep, 2019, 13 (1):209.
 [12]Antal  M, Nagy E, Braunitzer G, et al. Accuracy and clinical safety of guided root end resection with a trephine: a case series[J]. Head Face Med, 2019,15 (1):30.
 [13]Bencharit  S, Staffen A, Yeung M, et al. In vivo tooth-supported implant surgical guides fabricated with desktop stereolithographic printers: fully guided surgery is more accurate than partially guided surgery[J]. J Oral Maxillofac Surg, 2018,76 (7):1431-1439.
 [14]Skjerven  H, Riis UH, Herlofsson BB, et al. In vivo accuracy of implant placement using a full digital planning modality and stereolithographic guides[J].Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 2019,34 (1):124-132.
 [15]Seo  C, Juodzbalys G. Accuracy of guided surgery via stereolithographic mucosa-supported surgical guide in implant surgery for edentulous patient: a systematic review[J]. J Oral Maxillofac Res, 2018,9 (1):e1.
 [16]Cassetta  M, Giansanti M, Di Mambro A, et al. Accuracy of positioning of implants inserted using a mucosa-supported stereolithographic surgical guide in the edentulous maxilla and mandible[J]. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 2014,29 (5): 1071-1078.
 [17]Rajaran  JR, Nazimi AJ, Rajandram RK. Iatrogenic displacement of high-speed bur during third molar removal[J].BMJ case reports, 2017,2017: bcr2017221892.
 [18]Tanner  MC, Fischer C, Schmidmaier G, et al. Evidence-based uncertainty: do implant-related properties of titanium reduce the susceptibility to perioperative infections in clinical fracture management? A systematic review[J]. Infection, 2021,49 (5):813-821.
 [19]Ozer  SY, Ozkan G, Cetin E, et al. A comparative study of cone-beam computed tomography and periapical radiographs in decision-making after endodontic instrument fractures[J]. Int J Artif Organs, 2017,40 (9):510-514.

基金

浙江省属基本科研业务费专项资金资助;中国牙病防治基金会

PDF(9669 KB)

Accesses

Citation

Detail

段落导航
相关文章

/