M E H Wagner1, H Essig2, M Rücker2, T Gander2. 1. Klinik für Mund‑, Kiefer- und Gesichtschirurgie, UniversitätsSpital Zürich, Frauenklinikstr. 24, 8032, Zürich, Schweiz. maximilian.wagner@usz.ch. 2. Klinik für Mund‑, Kiefer- und Gesichtschirurgie, UniversitätsSpital Zürich, Frauenklinikstr. 24, 8032, Zürich, Schweiz.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In complex orbital reconstructions ideal positioning of the bony buttress and surrounding soft tissue is a prerequisite for an aesthetic and functional result. The use of computer-assisted surgery can support the surgeon before and during the reconstruction procedure and facilitate quality control processes. This is illustrated using three clinical examples. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The areas of interest (bony defect areas, surrounding tissues) are segmented in a 3D image series. In most cases, the contralateral non-affected side can serve as the reference in virtual reconstruction. The virtual model obtained can now be used for the manufacturing of patient specific models and implants, as well as for intraoperative navigation or direct quality control with the use of intraoperative cone beam computed tomography (CBCT). RESULTS: For the reconstruction of primary and secondary traumatic defects as well as for congenital malformations or neoplastic diseases, the presented workflow can be used. Preoperative virtual visualization, patient specific reconstruction and direct quality control using intraoperative CBCT ensure that the preoperatively planned result can be achieved. Together with the interplay of hard and soft tissue the best possible results can be achieved. CONCLUSION: Computer-assisted surgery has been continuously further developed over the last two decades and is currently used in the clinical routine. Patient specific implants in combination with the use of direct intraoperative quality control facilitate the reconstruction of complex orbital injuries and defects and enable the ideal reconstruction from both aesthetic and functional aspects.
BACKGROUND: In complex orbital reconstructions ideal positioning of the bony buttress and surrounding soft tissue is a prerequisite for an aesthetic and functional result. The use of computer-assisted surgery can support the surgeon before and during the reconstruction procedure and facilitate quality control processes. This is illustrated using three clinical examples. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The areas of interest (bony defect areas, surrounding tissues) are segmented in a 3D image series. In most cases, the contralateral non-affected side can serve as the reference in virtual reconstruction. The virtual model obtained can now be used for the manufacturing of patient specific models and implants, as well as for intraoperative navigation or direct quality control with the use of intraoperative cone beam computed tomography (CBCT). RESULTS: For the reconstruction of primary and secondary traumatic defects as well as for congenital malformations or neoplastic diseases, the presented workflow can be used. Preoperative virtual visualization, patient specific reconstruction and direct quality control using intraoperative CBCT ensure that the preoperatively planned result can be achieved. Together with the interplay of hard and soft tissue the best possible results can be achieved. CONCLUSION: Computer-assisted surgery has been continuously further developed over the last two decades and is currently used in the clinical routine. Patient specific implants in combination with the use of direct intraoperative quality control facilitate the reconstruction of complex orbital injuries and defects and enable the ideal reconstruction from both aesthetic and functional aspects.
Authors: Maximilian Eberhard Hermann Wagner; Jürgen Thomas Lichtenstein; Marcel Winkelmann; Hoen-Oh Shin; Nils-Claudius Gellrich; Harald Essig Journal: J Craniomaxillofac Surg Date: 2015-07-03 Impact factor: 2.078
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
Authors: Thomas Gander; Claudio Rostetter; Michael Blumer; Maximilian Wagner; Paul Schumann; Daniel B Wiedemeier; Martin Rücker; Harald Essig Journal: J Craniomaxillofac Surg Date: 2017-09-30 Impact factor: 2.078
Authors: Harald Essig; Majeed Rana; Andreas Meyer; André M Eckardt; Horst Kokemueller; Constantin von See; Daniel Lindhorst; Frank Tavassol; Martin Ruecker; Nils-Claudius Gellrich Journal: Radiat Oncol Date: 2011-11-16 Impact factor: 3.481
Authors: Thomas Gander; Harald Essig; Philipp Metzler; Daniel Lindhorst; Leander Dubois; Martin Rücker; Paul Schumann Journal: J Craniomaxillofac Surg Date: 2014-10-31 Impact factor: 2.078
Authors: Rüdiger M Zimmerer; Edward Ellis; Gregorio Sanchez Aniceto; Alexander Schramm; Maximilian E H Wagner; Michael P Grant; Carl-Peter Cornelius; Edward Bradley Strong; Majeed Rana; Lim Thiam Chye; Alvaro Rivero Calle; Frank Wilde; Daniel Perez; Frank Tavassol; Gido Bittermann; Nicholas R Mahoney; Marta Redondo Alamillos; Joanna Bašić; Jan Dittmann; Michael Rasse; Nils-Claudius Gellrich Journal: J Craniomaxillofac Surg Date: 2016-07-21 Impact factor: 2.078