Prediction of jaw opening function after mandibular reconstruction using subject‐specific musculoskeletal modelling

• Published in: Journal of oral rehabilitation Vol. 51; no. 6; pp. 1050 - 1060
• Main Authors: Chen, Junpeng, Wang, Jing, Guo, Jianqiao, Wang, Xinyue, Kang, Yanfeng, Wang, Yang, Guo, Chuanbin
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: England Wiley Subscription Services, Inc 01.06.2024
• Subjects: Accuracy; Computed tomography; Electromyography; Jaw; Kinematics; Mandible; mandibular reconstruction; multibody dynamics; musculoskeletal model; Predictions; Radiation therapy; range of motion; subject‐specific modelling; surgical planning; surgical planning; subject‐specific modelling; multibody dynamics; mandibular reconstruction; musculoskeletal model; range of motion
• ISSN: 0305-182X; 1365-2842
• DOI: 10.1111/joor.13670

Background Mandibular reconstruction patients often suffer abnormalities in the mandibular kinematics. In silico simulations, such as musculoskeletal modelling, can be used to predict post‐operative mandibular kinematics. It is important to validate the mandibular musculoskeletal model and analyse the factors influencing its accuracy. Objectives To investigate the jaw opening‐closing movements after mandibular reconstruction, as predicted by the subject‐specific musculoskeletal model, and the factors influencing its accuracy. Methods Ten mandibular reconstruction patients were enrolled in this study. Cone‐beam computed tomography images, mandibular movements, and surface electromyogram signals were recorded preoperatively. A subject‐specific mandibular musculoskeletal model was established to predict surgical outcomes using patient‐averaged muscle parameter changes as model inputs. Jaw bone geometry was replaced by surgical planning results, and the muscle insertion sites were registered based on the non‐rigid iterative closest point method. The predicted jaw kinematic data were validated based on 6‐month post‐operative measurements. Correlations between the prediction accuracy and patient characteristics (age, pathology and surgical scope) were further analysed. Results The root mean square error (RMSE) for lower incisor displacement was 31.4%, and the error for peak magnitude of jaw opening was 4.9 mm. Age, post‐operative infection and radiotherapy influenced the prediction accuracy. The amount of masseter detachment showed little correlation with jaw opening. Conclusion The mandibular musculoskeletal model successfully predicted short‐range jaw opening functions after mandibular reconstruction. It provides a novel surgical planning method to predict the risk of developing trismus.