The orbit first! A novel surgical treatment protocol for secondary orbitozygomatic reconstruction

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcms.2017.03.026Get rights and content

Abstract

A novel surgical treatment sequence for secondary orbitozygomatic complex (OZC) reconstruction is described. Orbital reconstruction is performed before OZC repositioning. A surgical plan is made: the affected OZC is virtually osteotomized and aligned with a mirrored model of the unaffected OZC. A patient-specific implant (PSI) is designed for orbital reconstruction. Screw holes from the primary reconstruction are used for fixation. Primary screw hole positions at the repositioned OZC are embedded in the design, to guide OZC repositioning. A second patient-specific design is made for guidance at the zygomaticomaxillary buttress.

The workflow was utilized in two patients. The PSI was positioned using navigation feedback. After repositioning of the zygomatic complex, the screw hole positions at the infraorbital rim and zygomaticomaxillary buttress seemed to align perfectly: no screw hole adjustments were necessary. Minor deviations were seen between planned and acquired PSI position; the mean errors between planned and acquired OZC position were 1.5 and 1.2 mm.

Orbital reconstruction with a PSI before OZC repositioning ensures true-to-original orbital reconstruction. The use of old screw hole positions enables the PSI to be used as a static guide for OZC repositioning. The combination of static and dynamic guidance increases predictability in secondary OZC reconstruction.

Introduction

The goal of orbitozygomatic complex (OZC) fracture treatment is three-dimensional restoration of the disturbed anatomy and reconstruction of orbital volume (Kellman and Bersani, 2002, Buchanan et al., 2012, Liu et al., 2013). In case of a comminuted fracture or a combination of an OZC fracture with a naso-orbito-ethmoid fracture, accurate restoration of transversal dimensions and subsequent reconstruction of the orbit can be challenging (Kelley et al., 2007, Li et al., 2011, He et al., 2012, Liu et al., 2013). Possible sequelae of inaccurate repositioning of the zygomatic complex are hemifacial widening, malar flattening and enophthalmos (Westendorff et al., 2006, Kelley et al., 2007, Kaufman et al., 2008, Yu et al., 2010).

If secondary reconstruction is indicated, an osteotomy of the OZC may be performed in order to mobilize the OZC and move it to its anatomical position (Kellman and Bersani, 2002, Buchanan et al., 2012). Orbital reconstruction is generally performed after repositioning of the OZC and therefore depends on the realized position of the OZC. Secondary restoration of OZC architecture is acknowledged to be a difficult procedure: anatomical landmarks are frequently lost due to bone remodelling, an effort to reconstruct has already been undertaken and there is no guarantee of an optimal outcome of the secondary reconstruction (Watzinger et al., 1997, Kellman and Bersani, 2002, Westendorff et al., 2006, Kelley et al., 2007, Lu et al., 2012).

In this technical note, a treatment protocol is described for secondary orbitozygomatic reconstruction. The surgical sequence has been reversed: the orbital reconstruction is performed before repositioning of the OZC. A surgical plan is made, which utilizes patient-specific computer-aided designing. To perform orbital reconstruction and guide the OZC repositioning, a novel idea has been developed using the position of screw holes of the primary reconstruction. These screw holes are implemented in the design of a cutting guide, for accurate osteotomy, and two patient-specific implants. These modalities have been combined with intra-operative navigation.

Section snippets

Virtual planning: mirroring

Pre-operatively, a Computed Tomography (CT) scan is acquired, with a dental navigation splint for intra-operative navigation registration (Venosta et al., 2014, Gander et al., 2015). The CT data are exported in DICOM format and subsequently imported in the iPlan software (version 3.0.5; Brainlab AG, Feldkirchen, Germany). The unaffected orbitozygomatic complex (OZC) is segmented and mirrored to the affected side (Metzger et al., 2007, Scolozzi and Terzic, 2011, Liu et al., 2013). The mirrored

Results

The workflow was utilized in two subsequent patients who were referred to the department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery at the Academic Medical Centre for secondary orbitozygomatic reconstruction. Inclusion criteria were inadequate primary reconstruction of the OZC fracture, with resulting enophthalmos and facial asymmetry, and the use of osteosynthesis material at the infraorbital rim and zygomaticomaxillary buttress. CT scans were acquired for pre-operative planning and imported in iPlan.

Discussion

Secondary reconstruction of the orbitozygomatic complex is difficult in all circumstances (Westendorff et al., 2006). A first effort to anatomically reconstruct the OZC has already been undertaken and introduces additional scarring and may be other iatrogenic lesions. A malpositioned orbitozygomatic complex generally requires re-osteotomization to reposition it to a correct anatomical position (Kellman and Bersani, 2002). Computer-assisted surgery planning allows virtual restoration of the OZC (

Conclusion

A novel surgical treatment sequence for secondary orbitozygomatic complex reconstruction is described. Reconstruction of the orbit is performed first with the use of a patient-specific implant. This ensures true-to-original reconstruction of orbital anatomy. The screw hole positions in the PSI coincide with the fixation screws used in the primary reconstruction. Using old screw holes simplifies positioning of the implant itself. It also enables the PSI to be used as a static guide for OZC

Conflict of interest

None.

References (22)

Cited by (18)

  • Reconstructive Surgery

    2023, Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery
  • Primary reconstruction of combined orbital and zygomatic complex fractures with patient-specific milled titanium implants – A retrospective study

    2022, Journal of Cranio-Maxillofacial Surgery
    Citation Excerpt :

    Most of the studies regarding patient-specific implants for patients with facial fractures have focused on internal orbit reconstructions after isolated orbital fractures (Rana et al., 2015; Kärkkäinen et al., 2018; Chepurnyi et al., 2019). Recent studies have also presented patient-specific implant use in secondary zygomaticomaxillary complex and orbit reconstructions (He et al., 2012; Schreurs et al., 2017; Falkhausen et al., 2021) but currently no previous studies exist concerning patient-specific milled titanium implants in primary reconstruction of zygomaticomaxillary complex fractures with significant orbital wall involvement that would include postoperative assessment of both orbital volume and zygomatic fragment dislocation with 3D analysis tools. The purpose of this retrospective study was to compare postoperative outcomes between patients treated with patient-specific milled titanium implants and standard implants for primary surgical reconstruction of combined orbital and zygomaticomaxillary fractures.

  • Critical appraisal of patient-specific implants for secondary post-traumatic orbital reconstruction

    2022, International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery
    Citation Excerpt :

    The key to success in orbital reconstruction with a PSI may lie in the freedom in design it provides. A unique, compelling fit can be designed, and positioning according to the plan may be further controlled by navigation rulers and markers, the use of positioning guides, or a rim extension17–19,29,40. Other design options can be used to tailor the implant to the pathology of the patient, such as a volume overcorrection, or can enable zygomatic reduction and orbital reconstruction in a one-stage orbitozygomatic reconstruction19,20,31,41.

  • Advanced Diagnostics and Three-dimensional Virtual Surgical Planning in Orbital Reconstruction

    2021, Atlas of the Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Clinics of North America
View all citing articles on Scopus
View full text