Systematic Review of Clinical Applications of CAD/CAM Technology for Craniofacial Implants Placement and Manufacturing of Orbital Prostheses

Waqas Tanveer, Angela Ridwan-Pramana, Pedro Molinero-Mourelle and Tymour Forouzanfar
Additional contact information
Waqas Tanveer: Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Amsterdam University Medical Center, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Angela Ridwan-Pramana: Center for Special Care in Dentistry, Department of Maxillofacial Prosthodontics, Stichting Bijzondere Tandheelkunde, 1081 LA Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Pedro Molinero-Mourelle: Department of Reconstructive Dentistry and Gerodontology, School of Dental Medicine, University of Bern, CHE 3012 Bern, Switzerland
Tymour Forouzanfar: Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery/Oral Pathology and 3D Innovation Lab, Amsterdam University Medical Center, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands

IJERPH, 2021, vol. 18, issue 21, 1-22

Abstract: This systematic review was aimed at gathering technical and clinical applications of CAD/CAM technology for the preoperative planning of craniofacial implants placement, designing of molds and substructures and fabrication of orbital prostheses. Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines, an electronic search was executed. Human studies that utilized digital planning systems for the prosthetic rehabilitation of orbital defects were included. A total of 16 studies of 30 clinical cases, which were virtually planned through various digital planning and designing software, were included. The most common preoperative data required for digital planning were CT scans in 15 cases, the 3DSS-STD-II scanning system in 5 cases, an Artec Color 3D scanner in 3 cases and a NextEngine Desktop 3D laser scanner in 2 cases. Meanwhile, the digital designing software were Ease Orbital Implant Planning EOIPlan software in eight cases, Geomagic software in eight cases, Simplant software in four cases and Artec Studio 12 Professional in three cases. Surgical templates were fabricated for 12 cases to place 41 craniofacial implants in the orbital defect area. An image-guided surgical navigation system was utilized for the placement of five orbital implants in two cases. Digital designing and printing systems were reported for the preoperative planning of craniofacial implants placement, designing of molds and substructures and fabrication of orbital prostheses. The studies concluded that the digital planning, designing and fabrication of orbital prostheses reduce the clinical and laboratory times, reduces patient visits and provide a satisfactory outcome; however, technical skills and equipment costs are posing limitations on the use of these digital systems.

Keywords: orbital prosthesis; digital planning; digital workflow; craniofacial implants; guided implants surgery (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: I I1 I3 Q Q5 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2021
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/21/11349/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/21/11349/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:21:p:11349-:d:667222

Access Statistics for this article

IJERPH is currently edited by Ms. Jenna Liu

More articles in IJERPH from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().