Comparison of Miniplates and Reconstruction Plates in Fibular Flap Reconstruction of the Mandible

Background: Mandibular reconstruction using free fibular flaps can be performed using various plating techniques. Miniplates (≤2.0 mm) and reconstruction plates (>2.0 mm) have different characteristics that provide theoretical advantages and disadvantages with regard to successful neomandibular fixation. Methods: A retrospective review of 117 patients undergoing free fibular reconstruction of segmental mandibular defects over the past 10 years was performed. Characteristic data and complication rates were recorded; the authors compared patients who had fibular reconstruction of their mandibular defect with miniplates (n = 86) with those who underwent repair using reconstruction plates (n = 31). Results: No statistically significant difference was identified when comparing miniplates and reconstruction plates with regard to overall cumulative complication rates (46 versus 48 percent), flap failure (15 percent versus 27 percent), plate extrusion (23 percent versus 25 percent), malunion or nonunion (14 percent versus 13 percent), and plate fracture (10 percent versus 0 percent). (The cumulative percentage incidence weighs patient data according to length of follow-up.) The authors’ data did suggest a decreased incidence of osteonecrosis in the miniplate group (5 percent versus 38 percent; p = 0.02), but these results must be interpreted cautiously because of the small sample size. Conclusion: Selection of plate size, miniplate versus reconstruction plate, does not appear to affect the overall rate of complications in free fibular reconstruction of the mandible.

[1]  D. Hidalgo Titanium Miniplate Fixation in Free Flap Mandible Reconstruction , 1989, Annals of plastic surgery.

[2]  M. Buckley,et al.  Stress shielding effect of rigid internal fixation plates on mandibular bone grafts. A photon absorption densitometry and quantitative computerized tomographic evaluation. , 1989, International journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery.

[3]  T. Lim,et al.  Fixation of vascularized bone graft in mandibular reconstruction. , 1993, Plastic and reconstructive surgery.

[4]  J B Boyd,et al.  Fixation of the Vascularized Bone Graft in Mandibular Reconstruction , 1993, Plastic and reconstructive surgery.

[5]  N. Futran,et al.  Rigid fixation of vascularized bone grafts in mandibular reconstruction. , 1995, Archives of otolaryngology--head & neck surgery.

[6]  P. Manson,et al.  Role of Mini- and Microplate Fixation in Fractures of the Midface and Mandible , 1995, Annals of plastic surgery.

[7]  R. Milner,et al.  An evaluation of the Würzburg titanium miniplate osteosynthesis system for mandibular fixation. , 1997, British journal of plastic surgery.

[8]  D. Klotch,et al.  Assessment of Plate Use for Mandibular Reconstruction: Has Changing Technology Made a Difference? , 1999, Otolaryngology--head and neck surgery : official journal of American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery.

[9]  S. Strackee,et al.  Fixation methods in mandibular reconstruction using fibula grafts: A comparative study into the relative strength of three different types of osteosynthesis , 2001, Head & neck.

[10]  D. Hidalgo,et al.  Free‐Flap Mandibular Reconstruction: A 10‐Year Follow‐Up Study , 2002, Plastic and reconstructive surgery.

[11]  James S. Brown,et al.  Comparison of miniplates and reconstruction plates in mandibular reconstruction , 2004, Head & neck.

[12]  O. Militsakh,et al.  Use of the 2.0-mm Locking Reconstruction Plate in Primary Oromandibular Reconstruction after Composite Resection , 2004, Otolaryngology--head and neck surgery : official journal of American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery.

[13]  N. Futran,et al.  Efficacy of small reconstruction plates in vascularized bone graft mandibular reconstruction , 2006, Head & neck.