Complex midfacial reconstructions have greatly improved in quality with the introduction of computer aided/guided surgeries, 3D printing and Patient-specific implants. Our study reports a 10 year followup of midfacial reconstruction patients receiving different PSI for reconstruction.
Methodology: During the period between 2011-2020 patients with midfacial defects requiring reconstruction with PSI were pooled together and the data analysed. The CTs, intraoperative notes and postoperative followup notes were gathered. All surgeries were planned in a similar manner with the differences being in the material used and extents of defects; titanium PSIs for defects with alveolar segment involvement and PEEK onlays for defects with zygomatic involvement causing cheek prominence deficiencies.
Results: Although intraoperative positioning was accurate when compared to the virtual planning in all our patients, a number of them suffered soft tissue dehiscence specially those receiving Titanium PSIs.
Conclusions:From our experience PEEK seems to be more versatile and suitable for maxillofacial reconstructions but will need further modifications in methods of printing and reinforcement. Further research with larger sample sizes and different fabrication methods are need to assess the techniques further.