Davide Sozzi

Prof. Dr. Davide Sozzi

orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

12Years (2015-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 March 2019 in Journal of Cranio-Maxillofacial Surgery
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
GCGabriele Canzi
Gabriele Canzi
EPElena De Ponti
Elena De Ponti
Giorgio NovelliGiorgio Novelli
Giorgio Novelli
FMFabio Mazzoleni
Fabio Mazzoleni
OCOsvaldo Chiara
Osvaldo Chiara
DSDavide Sozzi
Davide Sozzi

Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
DSDavide Sozzi
Davide Sozzi
Andrea FilippiAndrea Filippi
Andrea Filippi
GCGabriele Canzi
Gabriele Canzi
EPElena De Ponti
Elena De Ponti
ABAlberto Bozzetti
Alberto Bozzetti
Giorgio NovelliGiorgio Novelli
Giorgio Novelli
Aim: the purpose of this work is to present an innovative protocol for virtual planning and surgical navigation in post-oncological mandibular reconstruction through fibula free flap. In order to analyze its applicability, an evaluation of accuracy for the surgical protocol has been performed. Methods: 21 patients surgically treated for mandibular neoplasm have been included in the analysis. The Brainlab Vector Vision 3.0® software for surgical navigation has been used for preoperative surgical planning and intra-operative navigation. A post-operative accuracy evaluation has been performed matching the position of mandibular landmarks between pre-operative and post-operative CT scans. Results: the maximal discrepancy observed was included between −3.4 mm and +3.2 mm, assuming negative values for under correction and positive values for overcorrection. An average grade of accuracy included between 0.06 ± 0.58 mm and 0.43 ± 0.68 mm has been observed for every mandibular landmark examined, except for mandibular angles that showed a mean discrepancy value included between 1.36 ± 1.73 mm and 1.46 ± 1.02 mm when compared to preoperative measurements. Conclusion: a satisfying level of accuracy has been observed in the protocol presented, which appears to be more versatile if compared to closed custom-made systems. The technique described may represent a valid option for selected patients, but it cannot be considered for routine activity because of the complexity of the method, the mobility of the jaw, the necessity of surgical navigator and the long surgical learning curve that is required.

1 September 2019 in Journal of Cranio-Maxillofacial Surgery
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
GCGabriele Canzi
Gabriele Canzi
EPElena De Ponti
Elena De Ponti
CFChiara Fossati
Chiara Fossati
Giorgio NovelliGiorgio Novelli
Giorgio Novelli
Stefania CimbanassiStefania Cimbanassi
Stefania Cimbanassi
DSDavide Sozzi
Davide Sozzi

26 February 2023 in Children
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
Cinzia MasperoCinzia Maspero
Cinzia Maspero
NCNiccolo Cenzato
Niccolo Cenzato
Francesco InchingoloFrancesco Inchingolo
Francesco Inchingolo
Maria Grazia CagettiMaria Grazia Cagetti
Maria Grazia Cagetti
Gaetano IsolaGaetano Isola
Gaetano Isola
Gianluca TartagliaGianluca Tartaglia
Gianluca Tartaglia
This research aimed to identify a new measurement to diagnose the sagittal maxillary and mandibular difference that considers the patient’s profile (soft tissue Wits appraisal: obtained by projecting points A and B on the occlusal plane and subsequently measuring the linear distance between the two points). This new measurement was compared to the conventional Wits appraisal obtained to diagnose sagittal jaw discrepancy. In total, 300 subjects (162 males, 138 females) aged between 6 and 50 years requiring orthodontic treatment were analyzed. The cephalometric tracings on the pre-treatment lateral cephalometric radiographs were obtained and the two measurements taken were the Wits appraisal and a new measurement which were both calculated and compared. The analysis of the linear correlations between the conventional Wits value and the measurement obtained on the soft-tissue were undertaken. The relevance was established at 5% (p < 0.05). The mean values were also calculated within sex and age classes, and comparisons between sexes were obtained employing the t test Student’s for independent samples. Subsequently, chi-square analysis was also utilized to verify the sex distributions in the age groups considered. The results obtained suggested that these two measurements were significantly correlated with each other, with no characteristic patterns of sex or age. These data allowed an estimation of the reference values of the new measurement (−1.9 mm and 5.4 mm for patients with Class I molar relationship) showing that the former was more variable than the latter. The new measurement could allow for an accurate evaluation of the jaws sagittal discrepancy from soft tissue analysis.

20 June 2018 in Journal of Cranio-Maxillofacial Surgery
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
DSDavide Sozzi
Davide Sozzi
DGDaniele Maria Gibelli
Daniele Maria Gibelli
GCGabriele Canzi
Gabriele Canzi
ATAlberto Tagliaferri
Alberto Tagliaferri
LMLorenzo Monticelli
Lorenzo Monticelli
Chiarella SforzaChiarella Sforza
Chiarella Sforza

Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
GCGabriele Canzi
Gabriele Canzi
Paolo AseniPaolo Aseni
Paolo Aseni
EPElena De Ponti
Elena De Ponti
Stefania CimbanassiStefania Cimbanassi
Stefania Cimbanassi
FSFabrizio Sammartano
Fabrizio Sammartano
DSDavide Sozzi
Davide Sozzi
Identifying groups of patients with homogeneous characteristics and comparable outcomes improves clinical activity, patients’ management, and scientific research. This study aims to define mild, moderate, and severe facial trauma by validating two cut-off values of the Comprehensive Facial Injury (CFI) score and describing their foreseeable clinical needs to create a useful guide in patient management, starting from the first evaluation. The individual CFI score, overall surgical time, and length of hospitalization are calculated for a sample of 1400 facial-injured patients. Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) analysis and the corresponding Area Under the Curve (AUC) is tested, and a CFI score ≥4 is selected to discriminate patients undergoing surgical management under general anesthesia (Positive Predictive Value, PPV of 91.4%), while a CFI score ≥10 is selected to identify patients undergoing major surgical procedures (Negative Predictive Value, NPV of 91.7%). These results are enhanced by the consensual trend of Length of Stay outcome. The use of the CFI score allows us to distinguish between the “Mild facial trauma” with a low risk of hospitalization for surgical treatment, the “Moderate facial trauma” with a high probability of surgical treatment, and the “Severe facial trauma” that requires long-lasting surgery and hospital stay, with an increased incidence of Intensive Care Unit admission.