Zachary S Peacock1, John C Magill2, Brad J Tricomi3, Brian A Murphy4, Vladimir Nikonovskiy5, Nobuhiko Hata6, Laurent Chauvin7, Maria J Troulis8. 1. Assistant Professor, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA. Electronic address: zpeacock@partners.org. 2. Principle Research Scientist, Physical Sciences, Inc, Andover, MA. 3. Masters Student, University of Massachusetts Boston; Research Fellow, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA. 4. Principle Scientist, Physical Sciences, Inc, Andover, MA. 5. Physical Sciences, Inc, Andover, MA. 6. Software Engineer, Assistant Professor, Department of Radiology, Harvard Medical School; Director, Surgical Navigation and Robotics Laboratory, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA. 7. Research Associate, Surgical Navigation and Robotics Laboratory, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA. 8. Associate Professor, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To assess the accuracy of a novel navigation system for maxillofacial surgery using human cadavers and a live minipig model. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We tested an electromagnetic tracking system (OsteoMark-Navigation) that uses simple sensors to determine the position and orientation of a hand-held pencil-like marking device. The device can translate 3-dimensional computed tomographic data intraoperatively to allow the surgeon to localize and draw a proposed osteotomy or the resection margins of a tumor on bone. The accuracy of the OsteoMark-Navigation system in locating and marking osteotomies and screw positions in human cadaver heads was assessed. In group 1 (n = 3, 6 sides), OsteoMark-Navigation marked osteotomies and screw positions were compared to virtual treatment plans. In group 2 (n = 3, 6 sides), marked osteotomies and screw positions for distraction osteogenesis devices were compared with those performed using fabricated guide stents. Three metrics were used to document the precision and accuracy. In group 3 (n = 1), the system was tested in a standard operating room environment. RESULTS: For group 1, the mean error between the points was 0.7 mm (horizontal) and 1.7 mm (vertical). Compared with the posterior and inferior mandibular border, the mean error was 1.2 and 1.7 mm, respectively. For group 2, the mean discrepancy between the points marked using the OsteoMark-Navigation system and the surgical guides was 1.9 mm (range 0 to 4.1). The system maintained accuracy on a live minipig in a standard operating room environment. CONCLUSION: Based on this research OsteoMark-Navigation is a potentially powerful tool for clinical use in maxillofacial surgery. It has accuracy and precision comparable to that of existing clinical applications.
PURPOSE: To assess the accuracy of a novel navigation system for maxillofacial surgery using human cadavers and a live minipig model. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We tested an electromagnetic tracking system (OsteoMark-Navigation) that uses simple sensors to determine the position and orientation of a hand-held pencil-like marking device. The device can translate 3-dimensional computed tomographic data intraoperatively to allow the surgeon to localize and draw a proposed osteotomy or the resection margins of a tumor on bone. The accuracy of the OsteoMark-Navigation system in locating and marking osteotomies and screw positions in human cadaver heads was assessed. In group 1 (n = 3, 6 sides), OsteoMark-Navigation marked osteotomies and screw positions were compared to virtual treatment plans. In group 2 (n = 3, 6 sides), marked osteotomies and screw positions for distraction osteogenesis devices were compared with those performed using fabricated guide stents. Three metrics were used to document the precision and accuracy. In group 3 (n = 1), the system was tested in a standard operating room environment. RESULTS: For group 1, the mean error between the points was 0.7 mm (horizontal) and 1.7 mm (vertical). Compared with the posterior and inferior mandibular border, the mean error was 1.2 and 1.7 mm, respectively. For group 2, the mean discrepancy between the points marked using the OsteoMark-Navigation system and the surgical guides was 1.9 mm (range 0 to 4.1). The system maintained accuracy on a live minipig in a standard operating room environment. CONCLUSION: Based on this research OsteoMark-Navigation is a potentially powerful tool for clinical use in maxillofacial surgery. It has accuracy and precision comparable to that of existing clinical applications.
Authors: Cellan V Thomas; Kevin G McMillan; Pete Jeynes; Tim Martin; Sat Parmar Journal: Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg Date: 2013-05-28 Impact factor: 1.651
Authors: Zachary S Peacock; Brad J Tricomi; Brian A Murphy; John C Magill; Leonard B Kaban; Maria J Troulis Journal: J Oral Maxillofac Surg Date: 2013-03-15 Impact factor: 1.895
Authors: S G Brouwer de Koning; F Geldof; R L P van Veen; M J A van Alphen; L H E Karssemakers; J Nijkamp; W H Schreuder; T J M Ruers; M B Karakullukcu Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2021-02-25 Impact factor: 4.379