A platform for research: civil engineering, architecture and urbanism
A platform for research: civil engineering, architecture and urbanism
Midfacial Reconstruction – A Systematic Review
AIM: Different lesions affecting the midfacial regions require surgical reconstruction. The aim of this study was to assess the different methods used in midfacial reconstruction after maxillectomy procedures. The various reported surgical reconstructive techniques focusing on the esthetic and functional outcomes are to be reviewed in this article.MATERIAL AND METHODS: A thorough PUBMED and hand-search of journals of relevance was performed on related terms and yielded 772 titles of which 45 abstracts were selected and obtained as full articles for further evaluation while the rest were excluded by title/abstract. According to the inclusion criteria; 14 of these studies were used to complete this article.RESULTS: In this review we showed that fibular and radial vascularized grafts were the most commonly reported methods in literature with a few other options. Computer aided design and surgical planning has been also reviewed and seems to be a rapidly evolving option for maxillofacial reconstruction. Lack of RCTs (randomized controlled trials) and large scale case series was noticed in this review making the evidence of poor quality.CONCLUSION: Methods of evaluation of reconstruction options mainly qualitative and subjective made the evaluation of the techniques in this review difficult.
Midfacial Reconstruction – A Systematic Review
AIM: Different lesions affecting the midfacial regions require surgical reconstruction. The aim of this study was to assess the different methods used in midfacial reconstruction after maxillectomy procedures. The various reported surgical reconstructive techniques focusing on the esthetic and functional outcomes are to be reviewed in this article.MATERIAL AND METHODS: A thorough PUBMED and hand-search of journals of relevance was performed on related terms and yielded 772 titles of which 45 abstracts were selected and obtained as full articles for further evaluation while the rest were excluded by title/abstract. According to the inclusion criteria; 14 of these studies were used to complete this article.RESULTS: In this review we showed that fibular and radial vascularized grafts were the most commonly reported methods in literature with a few other options. Computer aided design and surgical planning has been also reviewed and seems to be a rapidly evolving option for maxillofacial reconstruction. Lack of RCTs (randomized controlled trials) and large scale case series was noticed in this review making the evidence of poor quality.CONCLUSION: Methods of evaluation of reconstruction options mainly qualitative and subjective made the evaluation of the techniques in this review difficult.
Midfacial Reconstruction – A Systematic Review
Emara, Aala (author) / Abou ElFetouh, Adel (author) / Hakam, Maha (author) / Mostafa, Basma (author)
2016-06-17
doi:10.3889/oamjms.2016.067
Open Access Macedonian Journal of Medical Sciences; Vol. 4 No. 3 (2016): Sep 15 (OAMJMS); 468-475 ; 1857-9655
Article (Journal)
Electronic Resource
English
DDC:
710
| British Library Online Contents | 2007
Results of using 3-D simulation methods in treatment of midfacial fractures
| BASE | 2021
Deep learning in 3D cardiac reconstruction: a systematic review of methodologies and dataset
| Springer Verlag | 2025
REVIEW - Calais reconstruction recorded
Online Contents | 2000