# Use of CAD/CAM Workflow and Patient-Specific Implants for Maxillary Reconstruction: A Systematic Review

## TL;DR

This paper reviews how computer-assisted design and manufacturing improves maxillary reconstruction by using patient-specific implants, offering better accuracy and outcomes.

## Contribution

The study systematically evaluates the efficacy and limitations of CAD/CAM and patient-specific implants in maxillary reconstruction.

## Key findings

- CAD/CAM-guided techniques improve osteotomy accuracy and implant adaptation.
- Current data support the efficacy of CAD/CAM-based approaches but highlight limitations like high costs.
- The review outlines future directions for standardizing and adopting these techniques in clinical practice.

## Abstract

Background: Reconstruction of the maxilla and midface remains one of the most demanding challenges in craniofacial surgery, requiring precise planning and a clear understanding of defect geometry to achieve functional and esthetic restoration. Advances in computer-assisted surgery (CAS) and virtual surgical planning (VSP), based on 3D segmentation of radiologic imaging, have significantly improved the management of maxillary deformities, allowing for further knowledge of patient-specific information, including anatomy, pathology, surgical planning, and reconstructive issues. The integration of computer-aided design and manufacturing (CAD/CAM) and 3D printing has further transformed reconstruction through customized titanium meshes, implants, and surgical guides. Methods:This systematic review, conducted following PRISMA 2020 guidelines, synthesizes evidence from clinical studies on CAD/CAM-assisted reconstruction of maxillary and midfacial defects of congenital, acquired, or post-resection origin. It highlights the advantages and drawbacks of maxillary reconstruction with patient-specific implants (PSISs). Primary outcomes are represented by accuracy in VSP reproduction, while secondary outcomes included esthetic results, functions, and assessment of complications. Results: Of the 44 identified articles, 10 met inclusion criteria with a time frame from April 2013 to July 2022. The outcomes of 24 treated patients are reported. CAD/CAM-guided techniques seemed to improve osteotomy accuracy, flap contouring, and implant adaptation. Conclusions: Although current data support the efficacy and safety of CAD/CAM-based approaches, limitations persist, including high costs, technological dependency, and variable long-term outcome data. This article critically evaluates the role of PSISs in maxillofacial reconstruction and outlines future directions for its standardization and broader adoption in clinical practice.