Ramy M Gaber1, Eman Shaheen2, Bart Falter3, Sebastian Araya4, Constantinus Politis5, Gwen R J Swennen6, Reinhilde Jacobs7. 1. Assistant Lecturer and Doctoral Student, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Faculty of Dentistry, Ain Shams University, Cairo, Egypt, and Research Fellow, OMFS-IMPATH Research Group, Department of Imaging and Pathology, Catholic University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium. Electronic address: ramy.m.gaber@asfd.asu.edu.eg. 2. Clinical engineer, OMFS-IMPATH research group, Department of Imaging and Pathology, Catholic University of Leuven & Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, University Hospital of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium. 3. Consultant, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, University Hospital of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium. 4. Private Practice, Santiago, Chile. 5. Professor and Head, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Catholic University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium. 6. Professor, Maxillofacial and Facial Plastic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Cleft and Craniofacial Centre, Bruges, Belgium, and Three-Dimensional Facial Imaging Research Group, General Hospital St Jan, Bruges, Belgium. 7. Professor, OMFS-IMPATH Research Group, Department of Imaging and Pathology, Catholic University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to systematically review methods used for assessing the accuracy of 3-dimensional virtually planned orthognathic surgery in an attempt to reach an objective assessment protocol that could be universally used. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic review of the currently available literature, published until September 12, 2016, was conducted using PubMed as the primary search engine. We performed secondary searches using the Cochrane Database, clinical trial registries, Google Scholar, and Embase, as well as a bibliography search. Included articles were required to have stated clearly that 3-dimensional virtual planning was used and accuracy assessment performed, along with validation of the planning and/or assessment method. Descriptive statistics and quality assessment of included articles were performed. RESULTS: The initial search yielded 1,461 studies. Only 7 studies were included in our review. An important variability was found regarding methods used for 1) accuracy assessment of virtually planned orthognathic surgery or 2) validation of the tools used. Included studies were of moderate quality; reviewers' agreement regarding quality was calculated to be 0.5 using the Cohen κ test. CONCLUSIONS: On the basis of the findings of this review, it is evident that the literature lacks consensus regarding accuracy assessment. Hence, a protocol is suggested for accuracy assessment of virtually planned orthognathic surgery with the lowest margin of error.
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to systematically review methods used for assessing the accuracy of 3-dimensional virtually planned orthognathic surgery in an attempt to reach an objective assessment protocol that could be universally used. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic review of the currently available literature, published until September 12, 2016, was conducted using PubMed as the primary search engine. We performed secondary searches using the Cochrane Database, clinical trial registries, Google Scholar, and Embase, as well as a bibliography search. Included articles were required to have stated clearly that 3-dimensional virtual planning was used and accuracy assessment performed, along with validation of the planning and/or assessment method. Descriptive statistics and quality assessment of included articles were performed. RESULTS: The initial search yielded 1,461 studies. Only 7 studies were included in our review. An important variability was found regarding methods used for 1) accuracy assessment of virtually planned orthognathic surgery or 2) validation of the tools used. Included studies were of moderate quality; reviewers' agreement regarding quality was calculated to be 0.5 using the Cohen κ test. CONCLUSIONS: On the basis of the findings of this review, it is evident that the literature lacks consensus regarding accuracy assessment. Hence, a protocol is suggested for accuracy assessment of virtually planned orthognathic surgery with the lowest margin of error.
Authors: Alexandru Diaconu; Michael Boelstoft Holte; Paolo Maria Cattaneo; Else Marie Pinholt Journal: Dentomaxillofac Radiol Date: 2021-11-08 Impact factor: 2.419
Authors: Maysa Nogueira de Barros Melo; Ítalo Miranda do Vale Pereira; Alexander Tadeu Sverzut; Cássio Edvard Sverzut; Alexandre Elias Trivellato Journal: J Maxillofac Oral Surg Date: 2022-01-17
Authors: Jeroen Liebregts; Frank Baan; Pieter van Lierop; Martien de Koning; Stefaan Bergé; Thomas Maal; Tong Xi Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2019-02-28 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Frank Baan; Juliana F Sabelis; Ruud Schreurs; Gert van de Steeg; Tong Xi; Tom C T van Riet; Alfred G Becking; Thomas J J Maal Journal: PLoS One Date: 2021-01-26 Impact factor: 3.240