Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Use of finite element analysis in presurgical planning: treatment of mandibular fractures

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Irish Journal of Medical Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

The current clinical procedure for mandible fracture fixation is plate application. 3D reconstructions are used to validate procedures numerically preceding experimental analysis. This study outlines the methods used to reconstruct a numerical model of the mandible.

Methods

A CT scan from a 22-year-old male patient with a healthy unfractured mandible was obtained. A 3D reconstruction was carried out using Mimics via thresholding and segmentation techniques. Boundary conditions and muscle forces were applied, and simulations were performed using ABAQUS.

Results

3D reconstruction allows for precise anatomical dimensions, which can be used for further engineering analysis. Using the surgical Champy technique as an example, results showed that the mandible model returned to normal function post-plating.

Conclusions

The study shows the clinical relevance of 3D reconstructions to plan surgical procedures. Results illustrate the benefit of carrying out numerical validations as a prerequisite to experimental modelling and as a method of pre-validating surgical procedures.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Fernandez JR, Gallas M, Burguera M et al (2003) A three-dimensional numerical simulation of mandible fracture reduction with screwed miniplates. J Biomech 36:329–337. doi:10.1016/S0021-9290(02)00416-5

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Haug RH, Prather J, Indressano AT (1990) An epidemiologic survey of facial fractures and concomitant injuries. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 48:926–932. doi:10.1016/0278-2391(90)90004-L

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Gear AJL, Apasova E, Schmitz JP et al (2005) Treatment modalities for mandibular angle fractures. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 63:655–663. doi:10.1016/j.joms.2004.02.016

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Champy M, Lodde JP, Jaeger JH (1976) Biomechanical basis of mandibular osteosynthesis according to the FX Michelet method. Rev Stomatol Chir Maxillofac 77:248–251

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Potter J, Ellis E (1999) Treatment of mandibular angle fractures with a malleable noncompression miniplate. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 57:288–293. doi:10.1016/S0278-2391(99)90674-2

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Ellis E, Walker LR (1996) Treatment of mandibular angle fractures using one noncompression miniplate. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 54:864–872. doi:10.1016/S0278-2391(96)90538-8

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Mimics v11.11. Materialise, Belgium. Available via http://www.materialise.com/mimics

  8. ABAQUS v6.6-2, ©Dassault Systèmes, SIMULIA, Rhode Island, USA

  9. Sensation SOMATOM 64. Available via Siemens AG, 2002–2008. http://www.medinnovations.usa.siemens.com/products/ct/sensation/. Accessed 6 May 2008

  10. Korkmaz HH (2006) Evaluation of different miniplates in fixation of fractured human mandible with the finite element method. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 103:e1–e13. doi:10.1016/j.tripleo.2006.12.016

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Erkmen E, Simsek B, Yucel E et al (2005) Three-dimensional finite element analysis used to compare methods of fixation after sagittal split ramus osteotomy: setback surgery-posterior loading. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 43(2):97–104. doi:10.1016/j.bjoms.2004.10.007

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Holmgren EP, Seckinger RJ, Kilgren LM et al (1998) Evaluating parameters of osseointegrated dental implants using finite element analysis. A two dimensional comparative study examining the effects of implant diameter, implant shape and load direction. J Oral Implantol 24:80–88. doi :10.1563/1548-1336(1998)024<0080:EPOODI>2.3.CO;2

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Futterling S, Klein R, Straber W et al (1998) Automated finite element modelling of a human mandible with dental implants. In: Proceedings of the sixth international conference in Central Europe on computer graphics and visualization, University of West Bohemia, Campus Bory, Plzen, Czech Republic, vol 1, pp 103–110

  14. Koolstra JH, Van Eijden TMGJ (2005) Combined finite-element and rigid-body analysis of human jaw joint dynamics. J Biomech 38:2431–2439. doi:10.1016/j.jbiomech.2004.10.014

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Zee MD, Cattaneo PM, Dalstra M (2005) On the development of a rigid-body model of the mandible. In: International Symposium on Computer Simulation in Biomechanics Cleveland, Ohio, USA, 28–30 July 2005

  16. Hart RT, Hennebel VV, Thongpreda N et al (1992) Modelling the biomechanics of the mandible: a three-dimensional finite element study. J Biomech 25:261–286. doi:10.1016/0021-9290(92)90025-V

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Nagasao T, Kobayashi M, Tsuchiya Y et al (2002) Finite element analysis of the stresses around endosseous implants in various reconstructed mandibular models. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 30:170–177. doi:10.1054/jcms.2002.0310

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to acknowledge (1) funding from the Department of Mechanical and Aeronautical Engineering, University of Limerick, Ireland, (2) the Oral and Maxillofacial Clinic and Department of Radiology in the Mid-Western Regional Hospital, Ireland, and (3) Mr. Barry J. Doyle, Centre for Applied Biomedical Engineering Research (CABER), Department of Mechanical and Aeronautical Engineering, and the Materials and Surface Science Institute (MSSI), University of Limerick, Ireland.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Centre for Applied Biomedical Engineering Research (CABER), University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland

    E. P. Kavanagh, G. Kearns, F. Wallis & T. McGloughlin

  2. Department of Mechanical and Aeronautical Engineering, University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland

    E. P. Kavanagh, C. Frawley, G. Kearns, F. Wallis, T. McGloughlin & J. Jarvis

  3. Materials and Surface Science Institute (MSSI), University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland

    E. P. Kavanagh, G. Kearns, F. Wallis & T. McGloughlin

  4. Oral and Maxillofacial Clinic (OMFC), Mid-Western Regional Hospital, Limerick, Ireland

    G. Kearns

  5. Department of Radiology, Mid-Western Regional Hospital, Limerick, Ireland

    F. Wallis

Authors
  1. E. P. Kavanagh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. C. Frawley
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. G. Kearns
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. F. Wallis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. T. McGloughlin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. J. Jarvis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to E. P. Kavanagh.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kavanagh, E.P., Frawley, C., Kearns, G. et al. Use of finite element analysis in presurgical planning: treatment of mandibular fractures. Ir J Med Sci 177, 325–331 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11845-008-0218-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11845-008-0218-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation