Facial skeletal augmentation is one of many techniques used to enhance facial aesthetics.
It is especially useful in the malar, mandibular angle, and genial areas. For many
years, correction of facial contour deformities posed challenges for reconstructive
surgeons. Two-dimensional radiographic and photographic imaging modalities provided
limited diagnostic and treatment planning information. An arduous procedure could
be undertaken to take a facial impression and create a stone facial model of the facial
soft tissues. This three-dimensional (3D) model simulated the patient’s face but provided
no information on the underlying bony contours. The surgeon primarily used their artistic
ability to diagnose and treat facial contour deformities. Treatment was limited to
the use of stock implants that were placed as is or altered at the time of surgery.
With the more widespread use of computed tomography (CT) in the 1980s, 3D representations
of the patient’s facial skeletal anatomy became available. Computer technology has
advanced to allow an accurate duplication of a patient’s facial skeletal and soft
tissue anatomy. According to Winder and Bibb, medical rapid prototyping is defined
as the manufacture of dimensionally accurate physical models of human anatomy derived
from medical image data [
[1]
]. This technology was originally described by Mankowich and colleagues in 1990 [
[2]
]. With the use of this technology, the ability to manufacture or fabricate custom
craniofacial implants has evolved.To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
Purchase one-time access:
Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online accessOne-time access price info
- For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
- For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'
Subscribers receive full online access to your subscription and archive of back issues up to and including 2002.
Content published before 2002 is available via pay-per-view purchase only.
Subscribe:
Subscribe to Atlas of the Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Clinics of North AmericaAlready a print subscriber? Claim online access
Already an online subscriber? Sign in
Register: Create an account
Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect
References
- Medical rapid prototyping technologies: state of the art and current limitations for applications in oral and maxillofacial surgery.J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2005; 63: 1006-1015
- The display of three-dimensional anatomy with stereolithographic models.J Digit Imaging. 1990; 3: 200
- Custom designed facial implants.Facial Plast Surg Clin North Am. 2008; 16: 133-146
- Reconstruction of posttraumatic and congenital facial deformities with three dimensional computer-assisted custom designed implants.Plast Reconstr Surg. 1994; 94: 775-785
- Skeletal volume enhancement: implants and osteotomies.Curr Opin Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2004; 12: 349-356
- Comparative dosimetry of dental CBCT devices and 64 slice CT for oral and maxillofacial radiology.Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2008; 106: 106-114
- Comparative study of image quality for MSCT and CBCT scanners for dentomaxillofacial radiology applications.Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 2008; 129: 222-226
- Comparison between effective radiation dose of CBCT and MSCT scanners for dentomaxillofacial applications.Eur J Radiol. 2009; 71: 461-468
- Comparing 3-dimensional virtual methods for reconstruction in craniomaxillofacial surgery.J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2011; 69: 1184-1194
- Augmentation genioplasty with hard tissue replacement implants.J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1998; 56: 549-552
- HTR® polymer facial implants: a five year clinical experience.Aesthetic Plast Surg. 1995; 19: 445-450
- Genioplasty and chin augmentation with Medpore implants: a report of 650 cases.Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2008; 32: 220-226
- Facial skeletal reconstruction using porous polyethylene implants.Plast Reconstr Surg. 2003; 111: 1118-1827
- Malar, submalar, and midfacial implants.Facial Plast Surg. 2000; 16: 35-44
- Use of customized polyetheretherketone (PEEK) implants in the reconstruction of complex maxillofacial defects.Arch Facial Plast Surg. 2009; 11: 53-55
Communication with Synthes CMF®. West Chester (PA). Available at: www.synthes.com. Accessed July 16, 2011.
- An evaluation of the effectiveness of different techniques for intraoperative infiltration of antibiotics into alloplastic implants for use in facial reconstruction.Arch Facial Plast Surg. 2009; 11: 246-251
- Essentials of cheek and midface implants.J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2010; 68: 1420-1429
- Malar augmentation: a 5-year retrospective review of the silastic midfacial malar implant.Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1999; 125: 980-987
- A new approach to evaluation and surgery of the malar complex.Ann Plast Surg. 1988; 20: 206-214
- Profilplasty.Int Macro J Aesthic Plast Surg. 1971; 1: 12
- Facial keys to orthodontic diagnosis and treatment planning–part I.Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1993; 103: 299-312
- Facial keys to orthodontic diagnosis and treatment planning–part II.Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1993; 103: 395-411
- Cephalometric analysis of dentofacial normals.Am J Orthod. 1980; 78: 404-420
- Assessment of the anteroposterior soft tissue contour of the lower facial third in the ideal young adult.Am J Orthod. 1981; 79: 316-325
- Lip posture and its significance in treatment planning.Am J Orthod. 1967; 53: 262-284
Article info
Identification
Copyright
© 2012 Elsevier Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
