PURPOSE: The advent of imaging software programs has proved to be useful for diagnosis, treatment planning, and outcome measurement, but precision of 3-dimensional (3D) surgical simulation still needs to be tested. This study was conducted to determine whether the virtual surgery performed on 3D models constructed from cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) can correctly simulate the actual surgical outcome and to validate the ability of this emerging technology to recreate the orthognathic surgery hard tissue movements in 3 translational and 3 rotational planes of space. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Construction of pre- and postsurgery 3D models from CBCTs of 14 patients who had combined maxillary advancement and mandibular setback surgery and 6 patients who had 1-piece maxillary advancement surgery was performed. The postsurgery and virtually simulated surgery 3D models were registered at the cranial base to quantify differences between simulated and actual surgery models. Hotelling t tests were used to assess the differences between simulated and actual surgical outcomes. RESULTS: For all anatomic regions of interest, there was no statistically significant difference between the simulated and the actual surgical models. The right lateral ramus was the only region that showed a statistically significant, but small difference when comparing 2- and 1-jaw surgeries. CONCLUSIONS: Virtual surgical methods were reliably reproduced. Oral surgery residents could benefit from virtual surgical training. Computer simulation has the potential to increase predictability in the operating room.
PURPOSE: The advent of imaging software programs has proved to be useful for diagnosis, treatment planning, and outcome measurement, but precision of 3-dimensional (3D) surgical simulation still needs to be tested. This study was conducted to determine whether the virtual surgery performed on 3D models constructed from cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) can correctly simulate the actual surgical outcome and to validate the ability of this emerging technology to recreate the orthognathic surgery hard tissue movements in 3 translational and 3 rotational planes of space. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Construction of pre- and postsurgery 3D models from CBCTs of 14 patients who had combined maxillary advancement and mandibular setback surgery and 6 patients who had 1-piece maxillary advancement surgery was performed. The postsurgery and virtually simulated surgery 3D models were registered at the cranial base to quantify differences between simulated and actual surgery models. Hotelling t tests were used to assess the differences between simulated and actual surgical outcomes. RESULTS: For all anatomic regions of interest, there was no statistically significant difference between the simulated and the actual surgical models. The right lateral ramus was the only region that showed a statistically significant, but small difference when comparing 2- and 1-jaw surgeries. CONCLUSIONS: Virtual surgical methods were reliably reproduced. Oral surgery residents could benefit from virtual surgical training. Computer simulation has the potential to increase predictability in the operating room.
Authors: J M Plooij; G R J Swennen; F A Rangel; T J J Maal; F A C Schutyser; E M Bronkhorst; A M Kuijpers-Jagtman; S J Bergé Journal: Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg Date: 2009-01-22 Impact factor: 2.789
Authors: K Gavaghan; T Oliveira-Santos; M Peterhans; M Reyes; H Kim; S Anderegg; S Weber Journal: Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg Date: 2011-10-21 Impact factor: 2.924
Authors: Daniel Schneider; Peer W Kämmerer; Matthias Hennig; Gerhard Schön; Daniel G E Thiem; Reinhard Bschorer Journal: Clin Oral Investig Date: 2018-11-15 Impact factor: 3.573
Authors: Francisco Vale; Jessica Scherzberg; João Cavaleiro; David Sanz; Francisco Caramelo; Luísa Maló; João Pedro Marcelino Journal: Dental Press J Orthod Date: 2016 Jan-Feb
Authors: Frank Baan; Jeroen Liebregts; Tong Xi; Ruud Schreurs; Martien de Koning; Stefaan Bergé; Thomas Maal Journal: PLoS One Date: 2016-02-22 Impact factor: 3.240