A Review of the Most Commonly Used Additive Manufacturing Techniques for Improving Mandibular Resection and Reconstruction Procedures
Source abstract
Abstract
Background: Mandibular defects caused by trauma or tumor resection pose significant challenges in both functional and aesthetic reconstruction. Additive manufacturing (AM) technologies offer promising solutions for surgical planning and personalized treatment. Objectives: This review aims to evaluate current trends in the application of AM technologies for mandibular resection and reconstruction, with a particular focus on material selection, clinical integration, and technology-specific advantages. Methods: A structured literature review was performed using PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar. Studies published between January 2020 and May 2025 were screened using the following inclusion criteria: original peer-reviewed English-language research involving AM in mandibular surgery. The exclusion criteria included review articles, non-English sources, and non-mandibular studies. A total of 77 studies met the inclusion criteria and were analyzed in this review. Results: Based on the literature review conducted from 2020 to 2025, the most common restorative methods for the mandible using additively manufactured models include reconstruction with a titanium surgical plate bent to the curvature of the edges and angle of the mandible or a personalized titanium or PEEK surgical plate made directly based on the patient’s diagnosis. Implants made of Ti-6AL-4V ELI and bioceramic scaffolds are also used in the reconstruction process. They are developed based on patient diagnostic data and effectively replace the loss of mandibular bone structure. In addition, based on models and surgical guides created using additive manufacturing techniques, the performance of autogenous grafts from the fibula or iliac crest has improved significantly when used with a titanium implant plate. Conclusions: Additive manufacturing supports highly personalized and accurate mandibular reconstruction. The advantages of these methods include a reduced overall duration of procedures, a lower health risk for patients due to less reliance on general anesthesia, a near perfect match between the implant and the remaining hard tissues, and satisfactory aesthetic outcomes. However, success depends on the appropriate selection AM technology and material, particularly in load-bearing applications.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Additive Manufacturing and 3D Printing Technologies · Anatomy and Medical Technology · Dental materials and restorations
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Faculty of Mechanical Engineering and Aeronautics, Rzeszow University of Technology, 35-959 Rzeszow, Poland
Department of Maxillofacial Surgery, University Clinical Hospital named after Fryderyk Chopin in Rzeszów, 35-055 Rzeszów, Poland
Collegium Medicum, University of Rzeszów, 35-315 Rzeszów, Poland
Institute of Robots & Machine Design, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Military University of Technology, Gen. S. Kaliskiego Street, 00-908 Warsaw, Poland
Faculty of Mechatronics, Armament and Aviation, Institute of Rocket Technology and Mechatronics, Military University of Technology, Gen. S. Kaliskiego Street, 00-908 Warsaw, Poland
Funding
Military University of Technology
References (77)
Show source-provided references
1. Govind, A., Lugo, R., and Pogrel, M.A. (2025). Mandibular Reconstruction. Oral. Maxillofac. Surg., 645–672.10.1002/9781119842958.ch5.10 ↗
2. The progress in reconstruction of mandibular defect caused by osteoradionecrosis10.1155/2023/1440889 ↗
3. Bone volume change following vascularized free bone flap reconstruction of the mandible10.1016/j.jcms.2020.07.011 ↗
4. Mashrah, M.A., Aldhohrah, T., Abdelrehem, A., Sakran, K.A., Ahmad, H., Mahran, H., and Wang, L. (2021). Survival of vascularized osseous flaps in mandibular reconstruction: A network meta-analysis. PLoS ONE, 16.10.1371/journal.pone.0257457 ↗
5. Complications after soft tissue with plate vs bony mandibular reconstruction: A systematic review and meta-analysis10.1177/0194599820949223 ↗
6. Mandibular rehabilitation: From the Andy Gump deformity to jaw-in-a-day10.1002/lio2.595 ↗
7. Gibson, I., Rosen, D.W., and Stucker, B. (2021). Additive Manufacturing Technologies, Springer.10.1007/978-3-030-56127-7 ↗
8. Future trends of additive manufacturing in medical applications: An overview10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e26641 ↗
9. Allawi, N.I. (2021). Application of Reverse Engineering and Rapid Prototyping for Reconstruction of Human Mandible. arXiv.
10. Kumar, D., Yadav, P.K., and Bhaskar, J. (2021). 3D Modelling of Human Joints Using Reverse Engineering for Biomedical Applications. Advances in Manufacturing and Industrial Engineering, Springer.10.1007/978-981-15-8542-5_76 ↗
11. Salmi, M. (2021). Additive manufacturing processes in medical applications. Materials, 14.10.3390/ma14010191 ↗
12. The power of three-dimensional printing technology in functional restoration of rare maxillomandibular deformity due to genetic disorder: A case report10.1186/s13256-021-02741-5 ↗
13. Evaluating the accuracy of resection planes in mandibular surgery using a preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative approach10.1016/j.ijom.2020.06.013 ↗
14. Oldhoff, M.G.E., Mirzaali, M.J., Tümer, N., Zhou, J., and Zadpoor, A.A. (2021). Comparison in clinical performance of surgical guides for mandibular surgery and temporomandibular joint implants fabricated by additive manufacturing techniques. J. Mech. Behav. Biomed. Mater., 119.10.1016/j.jmbbm.2021.104512 ↗
15. Virtual planning for mandible resection and reconstruction
16. Contemporary era of Three-dimensional printing in pediatric dentistry: An overview10.4103/jorr.jorr_35_22 ↗
17. Investigating the accuracy of mandibulectomy and reconstructive surgery using 3D customized implants and surgical guides in a rabbit model10.1186/s40902-023-00375-9 ↗
18. Application of additive manufacturing in customized titanium mandibular implants for patients with oral tumors
19. Improving spatial resolution and diagnostic confidence with thinner slice and deep learning image reconstruction in contrast-enhanced abdominal CT10.1007/s00330-022-09146-y ↗
20. DICOM file format has better radiographic image quality than other file formats: An objective study10.1590/0103-6440202305499 ↗
21. Dino, J.A., Barani, S., Poornapushpakala, S., and Subramoniam, M. (2024, January 25–26). Implementation of Various Filtering Technique for Noise Removal in DICOM Images of Colon Carcinoma. Proceedings of the 2024 Global Conference on Communications and Information Technologies (GCCIT), Bangalore, India.10.1109/GCCIT63234.2024.10862212 ↗
22. Reconstructing and resizing 3D images from DICOM files10.1016/j.jksuci.2020.12.004 ↗
23. Qiu, B., van der Wel, H., Kraeima, J., Glas, H.H., Guo, J., Borra, R.J., and van Ooijen, P.M. (2021). Automatic segmentation of mandible from conventional methods to deep learning—A review. J. Pers. Med., 11.10.3390/jpm11070629 ↗
24. Mandibular bone segmentation from CT scans: Quantitative and qualitative comparison among software10.1016/j.dental.2024.05.022 ↗
25. Syuhada, F., Fatichah, C., and Fabroyir, H. (2024, January 11–12). Image Enhancement for Visualization Jaw Bone in DICOM CT Scans using Windowing Strategies, Adaptive Denoising Bilateral Filtering, and Sharpening. Proceedings of the 2024 7th International Seminar on Research of Information Technology and Intelligent Systems (ISRITI), Yogyakarta, Indonesia.10.1109/ISRITI64779.2024.10963391 ↗
26. Accuracy and precision of mandible segmentation and its clinical implications: Virtual reality, desktop screen and artificial intelligence10.1016/j.eswa.2023.122275 ↗
27. Artificial intelligence for fast and accurate 3-dimensional tooth segmentation on cone-beam computed tomography10.1016/j.joen.2020.12.020 ↗
28. Belikova, K., Rogov, O.Y., Rybakov, A., Maslov, M.V., and Dylov, D.V. (2021). Deep negative volume segmentation. Sci. Rep., 11.10.1038/s41598-021-95526-1 ↗
29. Three-dimensional reconstruction of jaw and dentition CBCT images based on improved marching cubes algorithm10.1016/j.procir.2020.05.148 ↗
30. Chalazoniti, A., Lattanzi, W., and Halazonetis, D.J. (2024). Shape variation and sex differences of the adult human mandible evaluated by geometric morphometrics. Sci. Rep., 14.10.1038/s41598-024-57617-7 ↗
31. Zhou, L., Miller, J., Vezza, J., Mayster, M., Raffay, M., Justice, Q., and Bernat, J. (2024). Additive manufacturing: A comprehensive review. Sensors, 24.10.3390/s24092668 ↗
32. Rehabilitation of long-term mandibular defects by whole-process digital fibula flap combining with implants: A case report10.1111/jopr.13627 ↗
33. Xu, G., Jia, J., Xiong, X., Peng, L., Bu, L.L., and Wang, X. (2022). Mandibular reconstruction with the contralateral vascularized iliac flap using individual design: Iliac crest used to reconstruct the ramus and the anterior border of the iliac wing used to reconstruct the inferior border: A case report. Front. Surg., 9.10.3389/fsurg.2022.924241 ↗
34. Zhong, S., Shi, Q., Van Dessel, J., Gu, Y., Sun, Y., Yang, S., and Politis, C. (2022). Biomechanical validation of structural optimized patient-specific mandibular reconstruction plate orienting additive manufacturing. Comput. Methods Programs Biomed., 224.10.1016/j.cmpb.2022.107023 ↗
35. Clinical application and accuracy analysis of 3D printing guide plate based on polylactic acid in mandible reconstruction with fibula flap10.21037/atm-20-6781 ↗
36. Moiduddin, K., Mian, S.H., Ameen, W., Alkindi, M., Ramalingam, S., and Alghamdi, O. (2020). Patient-specific surgical implant using cavity-filled approach for precise and functional mandible reconstruction. Appl. Sci., 10.10.3390/app10176030 ↗
37. The Use of 3D Model Printing for Acute Planning in Oral and Maxillofacial Traumatology10.2174/0118742106326414240910111024 ↗
38. Ferrari, M., Taboni, S., Chan, H., Townson, J., Gualtieri, T., Franz, L., Ruaro, A., Mathews, S., Daly, M., and Douglas, C. (2024). Hydrogel-chitosan and polylactic acid-polycaprolactone bioengineered scaffolds for reconstruction of mandibular defects: A preclinical in vivo study with assessment of translationally relevant aspects. Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol., 12.10.3389/fbioe.2024.1353523 ↗
39. Baumgartner, D., Schramel, J.P., Kau, S., Eberspächer-Schweda, M.C., Unger, E., Oberoi, G., and Peham, C. (2023). 3D printed plates based on generative design biomechanically outperform manual digital fitting and conventional systems printed in photopolymers in bridging mandibular bone defects of critical size in dogs. Front. Vet. Sci., 10.10.3389/fvets.2023.1165689 ↗
40. 3D Printing Applications for Craniomaxillofacial Reconstruction: A Sweeping Review10.1021/acsbiomaterials.3c01171 ↗
41. Clinical application of 3D-printed PEEK implants for repairing mandibular defects10.1016/j.jcms.2022.06.002 ↗
42. Kim, J.-W., Yang, B.-E., Hong, S.-J., Choi, H.-G., Byeon, S.-J., Lim, H.-K., Chung, S.-M., Lee, J.-H., and Byun, S.-H. (2020). Bone Regeneration Capability of 3D Printed Ceramic Scaffolds. Int. J. Mol. Sci., 21.10.3390/ijms21144837 ↗
43. Katschnig, M., Wallner, J., Janics, T., Burgstaller, C., Zemann, W., and Holzer, C. (2020). Biofunctional Glycol-Modified Polyethylene Terephthalate and Thermoplastic Polyurethane Implants by Extrusion-Based Additive Manufacturing for Medical 3D Maxillofacial Defect Reconstruction. Polymers, 12.10.3390/polym12081751 ↗
44. In-house 3D treatment planning for mandibular reconstruction by free fibula flap in cancer: Our technique, European Annals of Otorhinolaryngology
45. Mandibular Angle Contouring Using Porous Polyethylene Stock or PEEK-based Patient Specific Implants. A Critical Analysis10.1097/SCS.0000000000006926 ↗
46. Chokshi, S., Gangatirkar, R., Kandi, A., DeLeonibus, M., Kamel, M., Chadalavada, S., Gupta, R., Munigala, H., Tappa, K., and Kondor, S. (2025). Medical 3D Printing Using Material Jetting: Technology Overview, Medical Applications, and Challenges. Bioengineering, 12.10.3390/bioengineering12030249 ↗
47. Medical 3D printing with polyjet technology: Effect of material type and printing orientation on printability, surface structure and cytotoxicity10.1186/s41205-023-00190-y ↗
48. Improved technique of personalised surgical guides generation for mandibular free flap reconstruction using an open-source tool10.1186/s41747-021-00229-x ↗
49. Maruf, D.A., Ren, J., Cheng, K., Xin, H., Lewin, W., Pickering, E., and Clark, J.R. (2025). Evaluation of osseointegration of plasma treated polyaryletherketone maxillofacial implants. Sci. Rep., 15.10.1038/s41598-024-80335-z ↗
50. Msallem, B., Vavrina, J.J., Beyer, M., Halbeisen, F.S., Lauer, G., Dragu, A., and Thieringer, F.M. (2024). Dimensional Accuracy in 3D Printed Medical Models: A Follow-Up Study on SLA and SLS Technology. J. Clin. Med., 13.10.3390/jcm13195848 ↗
51. 3D printing titanium grid scaffold facilitates osteogenesis in mandibular segmental defects10.1038/s41536-023-00308-0 ↗
52. Outcomes of mandibular reconstruction using three-dimensional custom-made porous titanium prostheses10.1016/j.jormas.2022.09.002 ↗
53. Reconstruction of mandibular contour defect using patient-specific titanium implant manufactured by selective laser melting method10.1097/SCS.0000000000008513 ↗
54. Van Kootwijk, A., Moosabeiki, V., Saldivar, M.C., Pahlavani, H., Leeflang, M.A., Niar, S.K., and Zadpoor, A.A. (2022). Semi-automated digital workflow to design and evaluate patient-specific mandibular reconstruction implants. J. Mech. Behav. Biomed. Mater., 132.10.1016/j.jmbbm.2022.105291 ↗
55. Nemtoi, A., Covrig, V., Nemtoi, A., Stoica, G., Vatavu, R., Haba, D., and Zetu, I. (2022). Custom-Made Direct Metal Laser Sintering Titanium Subperiosteal Implants in Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery for Severe Bone-Deficient Patients—A Pilot Study. Diagnostics, 12.10.3390/diagnostics12102531 ↗
56. Lim, H.K., Choi, Y.J., Choi, W.C., Song, I.S., and Lee, U.L. (2022). Reconstruction of maxillofacial bone defects using patient-specific long-lasting titanium implants. Sci. Rep., 12.10.1038/s41598-022-11200-0 ↗
57. Xu, X., Cheng, K.J., Liu, Y.F., Fan, Y.Y., Wang, J.H., Wang, R., and Dong, X.T. (2021). Experimental validation of finite element simulation of a new custom-designed fixation plate to treat mandibular angle fracture. Biomed. Eng. OnLine, 20.10.1186/s12938-021-00851-1 ↗
58. Farajpour, H., Bastami, F., Bohlouli, M., and Khojasteh, A. (2021). Reconstruction of bilateral ramus-condyle unit defect using custom titanium prosthesis with preservation of both condyles. J. Mech. Behav. Biomed. Mater., 124.10.1016/j.jmbbm.2021.104765 ↗
59. Koper, D.C., Leung, C.A., Smeets, L.C., Laeven, P.F., Tuijthof, G.J., and Kessler, P.A. (2021). Topology optimization of a mandibular reconstruction plate and biomechanical validation. J. Mech. Behav. Biomed. Mater., 113.10.1016/j.jmbbm.2020.104157 ↗
60. Lang, J.J., Bastian, M., Foehr, P., Seebach, M., Weitz, J., von Deimling, C., and Burgkart, R. (2021). Improving mandibular reconstruction by using topology optimization, patient specific design and additive manufacturing?—A biomechanical comparison against miniplates on human specimen. PLoS ONE, 16.10.1371/journal.pone.0253002 ↗
61. Msallem, B., Sharma, N., Cao, S., Halbeisen, F.S., Zeilhofer, H.-F., and Thieringer, F.M. (2020). Evaluation of the Dimensional Accuracy of 3D-Printed Anatomical Mandibular Models Using FFF, SLA, SLS, MJ, and BJ Printing Technology. J. Clin. Med., 9.10.3390/jcm9030817 ↗
62. 3D-printed titanium implant with pre-mounted dental implants for mandible reconstruction: A case report10.1186/s40902-020-00272-5 ↗
63. Grecchi, F., Zecca, P.A., Macchi, A., Mangano, A., Riva, F., Grecchi, E., and Mangano, C. (2020). Full-Digital Workflow for Fabricating a Custom-Made Direct Metal Laser Sintering (DMLS) Mandibular Implant: A Case Report. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health, 17.10.3390/ijerph17082693 ↗
64. Custom-made 3D printed subperiosteal titanium implants for the prosthetic restoration of the atrophic posterior mandible of elderly patients: A case series10.1186/s41205-019-0055-x ↗
65. Integrative and multi-disciplinary framework for the 3D rehabilitation of large mandibular defects10.1007/s00170-019-04762-3 ↗
66. Tatti, M., Carta, F., Bontempi, M., Deriu, S., Mariani, C., Marrosu, V., Foddis, E., Gerosa, C., Marongiu, G., and Saba, L. (2024). Segmental Mandibulectomy and Mandibular Reconstruction with Fibula-Free Flap Using a 3D Template. J. Pers. Med., 14.10.3390/jpm14050512 ↗
67. Patient-specific plates for facial fracture surgery: A retrospective case series10.1016/j.jdent.2023.104650 ↗
68. Zhang, B., Yin, X., Zhang, F., Hong, Y., Qiu, Y., Yang, X., and Gou, Z. (2023). Customized bioceramic scaffolds and metal meshes for challenging large-size mandibular bone defect regeneration and repair. Regen. Biomater., 10.10.1093/rb/rbad057 ↗
69. A custom-made removable appliance for the decompression of odontogenic cysts fabricated using a digital workflow10.1016/j.jdent.2022.104295 ↗
70. Türker, H., Aksoy, B., and Özsoy, K. (2022). Fabrication of Customized dental guide by stereolithography method and evaluation of dimensional accuracy with artificial neural networks. J. Mech. Behav. Biomed. Mater., 126.10.1016/j.jmbbm.2021.105071 ↗
71. Ryu, J.-I., Yang, B.-E., Yi, S.-M., Choi, H.G., On, S.-W., Hong, S.J., Lim, H.-K., and Byun, S.-H. (2021). Bone Regeneration of a 3D-Printed Alloplastic and Particulate Xenogenic Graft with rhBMP-2. Int. J. Mol. Sci., 22.10.3390/ijms222212518 ↗
72. Customized surgical guide with a bite block and retraction arm for a deeply impacted odontoma; a technical note10.1016/j.jormas.2020.05.003 ↗
73. Accuracy of maxillofacial prototypes fabricated by different 3-dimensional printing technologies using multi-slice and cone-beam computed tomography10.5624/isd.20200175 ↗
74. Xu, F., Ren, H., Zheng, M., Shao, X., Dai, T., Wu, Y., and Liu, Y. (2020). Development of biodegradable bioactive glass ceramics by DLP printed containing EPCs/BMSCs for bone tissue engineering of rabbit mandible defects. J. Mech. Behav. Biomed. Mater., 103.10.1016/j.jmbbm.2019.103532 ↗
75. Comparison of different 3D printers in terms of dimensional stability by image data of a dry human mandible obtained from CBCT and CT10.1177/03913988231212405 ↗
76. Microstructural development during additive manufacturing of biomedical grade Ti-6Al-4V alloy by three-dimensional binder jetting: Material aspects and mechanical properties10.1007/s00170-023-11661-1 ↗
77. Kuah, K.X., Salehi, M., Huang, Z., Zhang, S.X., Seet, H.L., Nai, M.L.S., and Blackwood, D.J. (2022). Surface modification with phosphate and hydroxyapatite of porous magnesium scaffolds fabricated by binder jet additive manufacturing. Crystals, 12.10.3390/cryst12121850 ↗