Literature DB >> 17656126

Verification of clinical precision after computer-aided reconstruction in craniomaxillofacial surgery.

Marc Christian Metzger1, Bettina Hohlweg-Majert, Ralf Schön, Matthias Teschner, Nils-Claudius Gellrich, Rainer Schmelzeisen, Ralf Gutwald.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Computer-aided surgery (CAS) has proved to be useful in reconstructive craniomaxillofacial surgery. Preoperative creation of virtual models by segmentation of the computerized tomography (CT) dataset and mirroring of the unaffected side allows for precise planning of complex reconstructive procedures. The aim of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of the preoperative planning and the postoperative result regarding the skeletal reconstruction. STUDY
DESIGN: In a first step, the symmetry of unaffected human skulls and faces were evaluated by 20 midface CT data of skulls and 20 surface-scan data of healthy individuals. By mirroring and adjusting the original and mirrored datasets using a 3-dimensional modeling software, an automatic measurement procedure could evaluate the mean and the maximal modulus of the distances between both datasets. In a second step, 18 consecutive cases were selected which had been treated with CAS support. Group 1 consisted of orbital floor and/or medial wall fractures (n = 12), group 2 consisted of zygomatic bone fractures (n = 4), and group 3 included 2 patients who were treated by secondary orbital reconstruction including reosteotomy of the zygomatic bone (n = 2). To verify the surgical result, the preoperative CT dataset including the virtual planning and the postoperative CT dataset were compared by using image fusion. Additionally, postoperative surface scans and the clinical symptoms of the patients were evaluated.
RESULTS: No differences between the skull and face symmetry were found. Mean values for distances considering the skull symmetry were 0.83 mm for male and 0.71 mm for female and for the face symmetry 0.65 mm for male and 0.76 mm for female. Comparing the preoperative planning with the postoperative outcome, a mean accuracy of 1.49-4.12 mm with maximum modulus of 2.49-6.00 mm was achieved. Orbital true-to-original reconstructions and the secondary reconstructions were more precise than the reposition of the zygomatic bones. The postoperative acquired surface scans resulted in mean distances from 0.89 to 1.784 mm. Despite these deviations, all patients demonstrated satisfying clinical outcome.
CONCLUSION: The natural asymmetry in humans influences the accuracy of preoperative planning procedure, when the mirroring tool is used. The accuracy transforming the preoperative planning to the surgical reconstruction using CAS depends on location, surgical approach, and matter of reconstruction.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17656126     DOI: 10.1016/j.tripleo.2007.04.015

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod        ISSN: 1079-2104


  20 in total

Review 1.  The current status of cone beam computed tomography imaging in orthodontics.

Authors:  S Kapila; R S Conley; W E Harrell
Journal:  Dentomaxillofac Radiol       Date:  2011-01       Impact factor: 2.419

2.  Reconstruction of a maxillary defect with a fibula graft and titanium mesh using CAD/CAM techniques.

Authors:  Bernd Lethaus; Peter Kessler; Roland Boeckman; Lucas J Poort; Rene Tolba
Journal:  Head Face Med       Date:  2010-07-19       Impact factor: 2.151

3.  Planning of skull reconstruction based on a statistical shape model combined with geometric morphometrics.

Authors:  Marc Anton Fuessinger; Steffen Schwarz; Carl-Peter Cornelius; Marc Christian Metzger; Edward Ellis; Florian Probst; Wiebke Semper-Hogg; Mathieu Gass; Stefan Schlager
Journal:  Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg       Date:  2017-10-28       Impact factor: 2.924

Review 4.  [Function-retaining reconstruction after orbital trauma].

Authors:  M C Metzger; W A Lagrèze; R Schön
Journal:  Ophthalmologe       Date:  2011-06       Impact factor: 1.059

Review 5.  Secondary reconstruction of panfacial fractures.

Authors:  Ruba Khader; Aaron Wallender; Joseph E Van Sickels; Larry L Cunningham
Journal:  Oral Maxillofac Surg       Date:  2013-03-20

6.  Design and development of a virtual anatomic atlas of the human skull for automatic segmentation in computer-assisted surgery, preoperative planning, and navigation.

Authors:  M C Metzger; G Bittermann; L Dannenberg; R Schmelzeisen; N-C Gellrich; B Hohlweg-Majert; C Scheifele
Journal:  Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg       Date:  2013-02-17       Impact factor: 2.924

7.  Reconstruction of the maxilla using a fibula graft and virtual planning techniques.

Authors:  Kristian Rude; Torben H Thygesen; Jens Ahm Sørensen
Journal:  BMJ Case Rep       Date:  2014-05-14

8.  BaS analysis: a new cephalometric study for craniofacial malformations.

Authors:  Sandro Pelo; Laura Cacucci; Roberto Boniello; Alessandro Moro; Roberto Deli; Cristina Grippaudo; Concezio Di Rocco; Gianpiero Tamburrini; Luca Massimi; Massimo Caldarelli; Giulio Gasparini
Journal:  Childs Nerv Syst       Date:  2009-02-27       Impact factor: 1.475

9.  Biomaterials in skull base surgery.

Authors:  Wolfgang Maier
Journal:  GMS Curr Top Otorhinolaryngol Head Neck Surg       Date:  2011-03-10

10.  The accuracy of computer-assisted primary mandibular reconstruction with vascularized bone flaps: iliac crest bone flap versus osteomyocutaneous fibula flap.

Authors:  Ali Modabber; Nassim Ayoub; Stephan Christian Möhlhenrich; Evgeny Goloborodko; Tolga Taha Sönmez; Mehrangiz Ghassemi; Christina Loberg; Bernd Lethaus; Alireza Ghassemi; Frank Hölzle
Journal:  Med Devices (Auckl)       Date:  2014-06-16
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.