Wael Hasan1,2, Michael J Daly1, Harley H L Chan1, Jimmy Qiu1, Jonathan C Irish1,2. 1. Guided Therapeutics (GTx) Program, TECHNA Institute, University of Toronto, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. 2. Department of Otolaryngology-Head & Neck Surgery/Surgical Oncology, University of Toronto, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Surgical navigation systems based on preoperative imaging are now increasingly used for guidance of head and neck resection and reconstruction. The primary aim of this study was to quantify osteotomy cutting accuracy using an image-guidance system for intraoperative cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) imaging and surgical saw navigation. To enable clinical translation of this CBCT-guided navigation system, a secondary aim of the study was to design and fabricate a patient reference tracker suitable for clinical use on a mobile mandible. METHODS: First, a preclinical cadaveric study was performed to quantify navigation accuracy with the use of clinically suitable patient reference trackers. Second, a proof-of-principle patient study was conducted to evaluate this technique under clinical conditions. RESULTS: In both preclinical (5 cadavers) and clinical (5 patients) experiments, the mean cutting accuracy was less than 2 mm. In all preclinical specimens, bilateral mandibulectomies and bilateral maxillectomies were performed, for a total of 20 cut planes for analysis. The mean (standard deviation [SD]) values for distance, pitch, and roll were 1.4 mm (1.1 mm), 4.2° (3.5°), and 2.9° (2.5°) mm, respectively. Five mandibulectomies were performed on five patients, for a total of 10 cut planes for analysis. The mean (SD) values for distance, pitch, and roll were 1.7 mm (0.8 mm), 5.4° (1.5°), and 6.7° (4.6°) mm, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The overall performance in comparison to alternative approaches warrants further consideration. In terms of accuracy, the results presented here are comparable to recent systematic reviews assessing CAD-CAM cutting guides that cite accuracies of ~2 to 2.5 mm. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2 Laryngoscope, 130:1122-1127, 2020.
OBJECTIVES: Surgical navigation systems based on preoperative imaging are now increasingly used for guidance of head and neck resection and reconstruction. The primary aim of this study was to quantify osteotomy cutting accuracy using an image-guidance system for intraoperative cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) imaging and surgical saw navigation. To enable clinical translation of this CBCT-guided navigation system, a secondary aim of the study was to design and fabricate a patient reference tracker suitable for clinical use on a mobile mandible. METHODS: First, a preclinical cadaveric study was performed to quantify navigation accuracy with the use of clinically suitable patient reference trackers. Second, a proof-of-principle patient study was conducted to evaluate this technique under clinical conditions. RESULTS: In both preclinical (5 cadavers) and clinical (5 patients) experiments, the mean cutting accuracy was less than 2 mm. In all preclinical specimens, bilateral mandibulectomies and bilateral maxillectomies were performed, for a total of 20 cut planes for analysis. The mean (standard deviation [SD]) values for distance, pitch, and roll were 1.4 mm (1.1 mm), 4.2° (3.5°), and 2.9° (2.5°) mm, respectively. Five mandibulectomies were performed on five patients, for a total of 10 cut planes for analysis. The mean (SD) values for distance, pitch, and roll were 1.7 mm (0.8 mm), 5.4° (1.5°), and 6.7° (4.6°) mm, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The overall performance in comparison to alternative approaches warrants further consideration. In terms of accuracy, the results presented here are comparable to recent systematic reviews assessing CAD-CAM cutting guides that cite accuracies of ~2 to 2.5 mm. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2 Laryngoscope, 130:1122-1127, 2020.
Authors: Axel Sahovaler; Michael J Daly; Harley H L Chan; Prakash Nayak; Sharon Tzelnick; Michelle Arkhangorodsky; Jimmy Qiu; Robert Weersink; Jonathan C Irish; Peter Ferguson; Jay S Wunder Journal: JB JS Open Access Date: 2022-05-05
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
Authors: Stefano Taboni; Marco Ferrari; Michael J Daly; Harley H L Chan; Donovan Eu; Tommaso Gualtieri; Ashok R Jethwa; Axel Sahovaler; Andrew Sewell; Wael Hasan; Ilyes Berania; Jimmy Qiu; John de Almeida; Piero Nicolai; Ralph W Gilbert; Jonathan C Irish Journal: Front Oncol Date: 2021-11-11 Impact factor: 6.244
Authors: Axel Sahovaler; Harley H L Chan; Tommaso Gualtieri; Michael Daly; Marco Ferrari; Claire Vannelli; Donovan Eu; Mirko Manojlovic-Kolarski; Susannah Orzell; Stefano Taboni; John R de Almeida; David P Goldstein; Alberto Deganello; Piero Nicolai; Ralph W Gilbert; Jonathan C Irish Journal: Front Oncol Date: 2021-11-01 Impact factor: 6.244
Authors: Mónica García-Sevilla; Rafael Moreta-Martinez; David García-Mato; Gema Arenas de Frutos; Santiago Ochandiano; Carlos Navarro-Cuéllar; Guillermo Sanjuán de Moreta; Javier Pascau Journal: Front Oncol Date: 2022-01-04 Impact factor: 6.244