The use of cranial resection templates with 3D virtual planning and PEEK patient-specific implants: A 3 year follow-up

S. E.C.M. van de Vijfeijken; R. Schreurs; L. Dubois; A. G. Becking; L. H.E. Karssemakers; D. M.J. Milstein; P. R.A.M. Depauw; F. W.A. Hoefnagels; W. P. Vandertop; C. J. Kleverlaan; T. J.A.G. Münker; T. J.J. Maal; E. Nout; M. Riool; S. A.J. Zaat; CranioSafe Group

doi:10.1016/j.jcms.2018.07.012

The use of cranial resection templates with 3D virtual planning and PEEK patient-specific implants: A 3 year follow-up

S. E.C.M. van de Vijfeijken^*, R. Schreurs, L. Dubois, A. G. Becking, L. H.E. Karssemakers, D. M.J. Milstein, P. R.A.M. Depauw, F. W.A. Hoefnagels, W. P. Vandertop, C. J. Kleverlaan, T. J.A.G. Münker, T. J.J. Maal, E. Nout, M. Riool, S. A.J. Zaat, CranioSafe Group

^*Corresponding author for this work

Neurosurgery

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › Academic › peer-review

Abstract

Purpose: The aim of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of resection templates in cranioplasties in order to facilitate a one-stage resection and cranial reconstruction. Patients and methods: In three cases, cranial resections were combined with direct reconstructions using the principles of computer-aided design, manufacturing, and surgery. The precision of the resection template was evaluated through a distance map, comparing the planned and final result. Results: The mean absolute difference between the planned and actual reconstructed contour was less than 1.0 mm. After 3 years, no clinical signs of infection or rejection of the implants were present. The computed tomography scans showed no irregularities, and the aesthetic results remained satisfactory. Conclusion: One-stage resection and cranial reconstruction using a resection template, control template, and a prefabricated patient-specific implant of poly(ether-ether-ketone) (PEEK) proved to be a viable and safe method.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	542-547
Number of pages	6
Journal	Journal of Cranio-Maxillofacial Surgery
Volume	47
Issue number	4
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcms.2018.07.012
Publication status	Published - 1 Apr 2019

Access to Document

10.1016/j.jcms.2018.07.012

Cite this

van de Vijfeijken, S. E. C. M., Schreurs, R., Dubois, L., Becking, A. G., Karssemakers, L. H. E., Milstein, D. M. J., Depauw, P. R. A. M., Hoefnagels, F. W. A., Vandertop, W. P., Kleverlaan, C. J., Münker, T. J. A. G., Maal, T. J. J., Nout, E., Riool, M., Zaat, S. A. J., & CranioSafe Group (2019). The use of cranial resection templates with 3D virtual planning and PEEK patient-specific implants: A 3 year follow-up. Journal of Cranio-Maxillofacial Surgery, 47(4), 542-547. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcms.2018.07.012

@article{247771de8c9948cd8c17871ce1eecacd,

title = "The use of cranial resection templates with 3D virtual planning and PEEK patient-specific implants: A 3 year follow-up",

abstract = "Purpose: The aim of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of resection templates in cranioplasties in order to facilitate a one-stage resection and cranial reconstruction. Patients and methods: In three cases, cranial resections were combined with direct reconstructions using the principles of computer-aided design, manufacturing, and surgery. The precision of the resection template was evaluated through a distance map, comparing the planned and final result. Results: The mean absolute difference between the planned and actual reconstructed contour was less than 1.0 mm. After 3 years, no clinical signs of infection or rejection of the implants were present. The computed tomography scans showed no irregularities, and the aesthetic results remained satisfactory. Conclusion: One-stage resection and cranial reconstruction using a resection template, control template, and a prefabricated patient-specific implant of poly(ether-ether-ketone) (PEEK) proved to be a viable and safe method.",

keywords = "CAD/CAM-CAS, Computer-aided design, manufacturing, and surgery, Craniectomy, Patient-specific implant, PEEK, PSI",

author = "{van de Vijfeijken}, {S. E.C.M.} and R. Schreurs and L. Dubois and Becking, {A. G.} and Karssemakers, {L. H.E.} and Milstein, {D. M.J.} and Depauw, {P. R.A.M.} and Hoefnagels, {F. W.A.} and Vandertop, {W. P.} and Kleverlaan, {C. J.} and M{\"u}nker, {T. J.A.G.} and Maal, {T. J.J.} and E. Nout and M. Riool and Zaat, {S. A.J.} and {CranioSafe Group}",

year = "2019",

month = apr,

day = "1",

doi = "10.1016/j.jcms.2018.07.012",

language = "English",

volume = "47",

pages = "542--547",

journal = "Journal of Cranio-Maxillo-Facial Surgery",

issn = "1010-5182",

publisher = "Churchill Livingstone",

number = "4",

}

van de Vijfeijken, SECM, Schreurs, R, Dubois, L, Becking, AG, Karssemakers, LHE, Milstein, DMJ, Depauw, PRAM, Hoefnagels, FWA, Vandertop, WP, Kleverlaan, CJ, Münker, TJAG, Maal, TJJ, Nout, E, Riool, M, Zaat, SAJ & CranioSafe Group 2019, 'The use of cranial resection templates with 3D virtual planning and PEEK patient-specific implants: A 3 year follow-up', Journal of Cranio-Maxillofacial Surgery, vol. 47, no. 4, pp. 542-547. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcms.2018.07.012

TY - JOUR

T1 - The use of cranial resection templates with 3D virtual planning and PEEK patient-specific implants

T2 - A 3 year follow-up

AU - van de Vijfeijken, S. E.C.M.

AU - Schreurs, R.

AU - Dubois, L.

AU - Becking, A. G.

AU - Karssemakers, L. H.E.

AU - Milstein, D. M.J.

AU - Depauw, P. R.A.M.

AU - Hoefnagels, F. W.A.

AU - Vandertop, W. P.

AU - Kleverlaan, C. J.

AU - Münker, T. J.A.G.

AU - Maal, T. J.J.

AU - Nout, E.

AU - Riool, M.

AU - Zaat, S. A.J.

AU - CranioSafe Group

PY - 2019/4/1

Y1 - 2019/4/1

N2 - Purpose: The aim of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of resection templates in cranioplasties in order to facilitate a one-stage resection and cranial reconstruction. Patients and methods: In three cases, cranial resections were combined with direct reconstructions using the principles of computer-aided design, manufacturing, and surgery. The precision of the resection template was evaluated through a distance map, comparing the planned and final result. Results: The mean absolute difference between the planned and actual reconstructed contour was less than 1.0 mm. After 3 years, no clinical signs of infection or rejection of the implants were present. The computed tomography scans showed no irregularities, and the aesthetic results remained satisfactory. Conclusion: One-stage resection and cranial reconstruction using a resection template, control template, and a prefabricated patient-specific implant of poly(ether-ether-ketone) (PEEK) proved to be a viable and safe method.

AB - Purpose: The aim of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of resection templates in cranioplasties in order to facilitate a one-stage resection and cranial reconstruction. Patients and methods: In three cases, cranial resections were combined with direct reconstructions using the principles of computer-aided design, manufacturing, and surgery. The precision of the resection template was evaluated through a distance map, comparing the planned and final result. Results: The mean absolute difference between the planned and actual reconstructed contour was less than 1.0 mm. After 3 years, no clinical signs of infection or rejection of the implants were present. The computed tomography scans showed no irregularities, and the aesthetic results remained satisfactory. Conclusion: One-stage resection and cranial reconstruction using a resection template, control template, and a prefabricated patient-specific implant of poly(ether-ether-ketone) (PEEK) proved to be a viable and safe method.

KW - CAD/CAM-CAS

KW - Computer-aided design, manufacturing, and surgery

KW - Craniectomy

KW - Patient-specific implant

KW - PEEK

KW - PSI

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85061316776&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.jcms.2018.07.012

DO - 10.1016/j.jcms.2018.07.012

M3 - Article

C2 - 30745010

AN - SCOPUS:85061316776

VL - 47

SP - 542

EP - 547

JO - Journal of Cranio-Maxillo-Facial Surgery

JF - Journal of Cranio-Maxillo-Facial Surgery

SN - 1010-5182

IS - 4

ER -

The use of cranial resection templates with 3D virtual planning and PEEK patient-specific implants: A 3 year follow-up

Abstract

Access to Document

Other files and links

Cite this