-
Journal of Clinical Medicine Sep 2023This systematic review was aimed at gathering the clinical and technical applications of CAD/CAM technology for craniofacial implant placement and processing of... (Review)
Review
This systematic review was aimed at gathering the clinical and technical applications of CAD/CAM technology for craniofacial implant placement and processing of auricular prostheses based on clinical cases. According to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines, an electronic data search was performed. Human clinical studies utilizing digital planning, designing, and printing systems for craniofacial implant placement and processing of auricular prostheses for prosthetic rehabilitation of auricular defects were included. Following a data search, a total of 36 clinical human studies were included, which were digitally planned and executed through various virtual software to rehabilitate auricular defects. Preoperative data were collected mainly through computed tomography scans (CT scans) (55 cases); meanwhile, the most common laser scanners were the 3dMDface System (3dMD LLC, Atlanta, Georgia, USA) (6 cases) and the 3 Shape scanner (3 Shape, Copenhagen, Denmark) (6 cases). The most common digital design software are Mimics Software (Mimics Innovation Suite, Materialize, Leuven, Belgium) (18 cases), Freeform software (Freeform, NC, USA) (13 cases), and 3 Shape software (3 Shape, Copenhagen, Denmark) (12 cases). Surgical templates were designed and utilized in 35 cases to place 88 craniofacial implants in auricular defect areas. The most common craniofacial implants were Vistafix craniofacial implants (Entific Medical Systems, Goteborg, Sweden) in 22 cases. A surgical navigation system was used to place 20 craniofacial implants in the mastoid bone. Digital applications of CAD/CAM technology include, but are not limited to, study models, mirrored replicas of intact ears, molds, retentive attachments, customized implants, substructures, and silicone prostheses. The included studies demonstrated a predictable clinical outcome, reduced the patient's visits, and completed the prosthetic rehabilitation in reasonable time and at reasonable cost. However, equipment costs and trained technical staff were highlighted as possible limitations to the use of CAD/CAM systems.
PubMed: 37762891
DOI: 10.3390/jcm12185950 -
JPRAS Open Dec 2023The prominent ear is a type of congenital ear deformity that can be corrected by a variety of nonsurgical treatments, such as splinting and the taping method. However,... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
The prominent ear is a type of congenital ear deformity that can be corrected by a variety of nonsurgical treatments, such as splinting and the taping method. However, there is no objective evaluation method that is universally accepted. The aim of this review is to evaluate objective measurement methods that are used in the available literature to analyze nonsurgical treatment of prominent ears.
METHODS
A systematic review was performed in the MEDLINE and Embase databases in December 2022 and updated on April 2023 according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematics and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guideline. Any study using objective measurements (continuous variables such as distance and angle) to evaluate the effect of nonsurgical treatment of prominent ears was included. The Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) critical appraisal for case series was used for quality assessment.
RESULTS
A total of 286 studies were screened for eligibility, of which five articles were eligible for inclusion. All of the included studies were case series. The helix mastoid distance (HMD) is the most commonly used parameter to measure treatment outcome. Pinna and cartilage stiffness, length, and width were also used, but without clear statistical relevance. HMD was classified into grading groups (i.e. good, moderate, and poor) to evaluate the treatment's effect.
CONCLUSION
Based on the included studies, objective measurements are rarely used, and when used, they are largely heterogeneous. Although HMD was the most frequent measurement used, all studies used different definitions for the measurement and grouped subsequent outcomes differently. Automated algorithms, based on three-dimensional imaging, could be used for object measurements in the nonsurgical treatment of prominent ears.
PubMed: 37694192
DOI: 10.1016/j.jpra.2023.07.002