Optimizing Osteotomy Geometries in Posterolateral Mandibulectomies
Authors: Kim Hugh Andrew Jinwook , De Biasio Michael J. , Forte Vito , Gilbert Ralph W. , Irish Jonathan C. , Goldstein David P. , de Almeida John R. , Hanasono Matthew M. , Yu Peirong , Chepeha Douglas B. , Looi Thomas , Yao Christopher M. K. L. 
Published: October 2024

ImportanceReconstructive stability after mandibulectomy with osseous autogenous transplant is influenced by masticatory forces and the resulting stress on the titanium plate.ObjectiveTo determine an optimal geometry of mandibular osteotomy that minimizes undesirable loading of the reconstruction plate.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsIn this combined in silico and in vitro basic science study, segmented computed tomography images of an adult male human mandible downloaded from the Visible Human Project were analyzed. Data were collected from July to November 2023.ExposuresFour posterolateral mandibular resections and bony transplants were modeled following (1) vertical, (2) angled, (3) step, and (4) sagittal osteotomies. Using SOLIDWORKS software, mastication was simulated under (1) incisal, (2) ipsilateral molar, and (3) contralateral molar loading. Mandible models were then 3-dimensionally printed, osteotomized, and plated. Masticatory loads were simulated using pulleys, and strains were measured using strain gauges.Main Outcomes and MeasuresOn the reconstruction plate, von Mises stresses were measured in silico, and strains were measured using strain gauges in vitro. Stress and strain are reactions of a material to loading that can result in irreversible deformation or fracture.ResultsIn silico, maximum plate stress was highest with the vertical osteotomy, followed by the angled osteotomy (median difference vs vertical: ipsilateral molar loading, 126 MPa; 95% CI, 18-172; incisal loading, −24 MPa; 95% CI, −89 to 31; contralateral molar loading, 91 MPa; 95% CI, 23-189), step osteotomy (median difference vs angled: ipsilateral molar loading, 168 MPa; 95% CI, 112-235; incisal loading, 80 MPa; 95% CI, 15-140; contralateral molar loading, −17; 95% CI, −115 to 83), and sagittal osteotomy (median difference vs step: ipsilateral molar loading, 122 MPa; 95% CI, 102-154; incisal loading, 197 MPa; 95% CI, 166-230; contralateral molar loading, 161 MPa; 95% CI, 21-232). An angled osteotomy had the lowest stress at 30° of angulation (median difference vs contralateral molar loading at 40° of angulation: 111 MPa; 95% CI, 4-186). In vitro, the vertical osteotomy had the highest maximum strain, followed by the angled osteotomy (mean difference vs vertical: incisal loading, 0.021 mV/V; 95% CI, 0.014-0.027; contralateral molar loading, 0 mV/V; 95% CI, −0.004 to 0.005), step osteotomy (mean difference vs angled: incisal loading, 0.015 mV/V; 95% CI, 0.003-0.028; contralateral molar loading, 0.021 mV/V; 95% CI, 0.016-0.027), and sagittal osteotomy (mean difference vs step: incisal loading, 0.006 mV/V; 95% CI, −0.006 to 0.018; contralateral molar loading, 0.020 mV/V; 95% CI, 0.015-0.026).Conclusions and RelevanceIn this study, the traditional vertical osteotomy resulted in less favorable plate stresses in all loading scenarios compared with angled, step, or sagittal osteotomies, in silico and in vitro. Future clinical studies analyzing the impact of varying osteotomy geometries are warranted to translate these findings to the operating room.