Does intraoperative navigation restore orbital dimensions in traumatic and post-ablative defects?

Markiewicz, Michael R.; Dierks, Eric J.; Bell, R. Bryan

doi:10.1016/j.jcms.2011.03.008

Cited by 69 publications

(45 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Limited surgical exposure hinders the view of the orbital defect and the verification of implant position during surgery (Markiewicz et al, 2012), which may be an important reason for suboptimal placement of the implant and for unsatisfactory outcomes such as enophthalmos and/or diplopia. Manson et al (1986) were the first to associate improper implant positioning with inadequate restoration of orbital volume, resulting in enophthalmos.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Predictability in orbital reconstruction: A human cadaver study. Part II: Navigation-assisted orbital reconstruction

Dubois

Schreurs

Jansen

et al. 2015

Journal of Cranio-Maxillofacial Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Preformed orbital reconstruction plates are useful for treating orbital defects. However, intraoperative errors can lead to misplaced implants and poor outcomes. Navigation-assisted surgery may help optimize orbital reconstruction. We aimed to explore whether navigation-assisted surgery is more predictable than traditional orbital reconstruction for optimal implant placement. Pre-injury computed tomography scans were obtained for 10 cadaver heads (20 orbits). Complex orbital fractures (Class III-IV) were created in all orbits, which were reconstructed using a transconjunctival approach with and without navigation. The best possible fit of the stereolithographic file of a preformed orbital mesh plate was used as the optimal position for reconstruction. The accuracy of the implant positions was evaluated using iPlan software. The consistency of orbital reconstruction was lower in the traditional reconstructions than in the navigation group in the parameters of translation and rotation. Implant position also differed significantly in the parameters of translation (p = 0.002) and rotation (pitch: p = 0.77; yaw: p < 0.001; roll: p = 0.001). Compared with traditional orbital reconstruction, navigation-assisted reconstruction provides more predictable anatomical reconstruction of complex orbital defects and significantly improves orbital implant position.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Predictability in orbital reconstruction: A human cadaver study. Part II: Navigation-assisted orbital reconstruction

Dubois

Schreurs

Jansen

et al. 2015

Journal of Cranio-Maxillofacial Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In oral and maxillofacial surgery, there have been clinical reports detailing the successful implementation of navigation systems for various operations (Lubbers et al, 2011a), including implant placement (Widmann et al, 2007;Xiaojun et al, 2007), trauma (Yu et al, 2010;Markiewicz et al, 2012), foreign body removal (Eggers et al, 2009a;Verhaeghe et al, 2012), tumor resection (Lubbers et al, 2011c), and orthognathic surgery (Lo et al, 2010).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Validation of anatomical landmarks-based registration for image-guided surgery: An in-vitro study

Sun

Luebbers

Agbaje

et al. 2013

Journal of Cranio-Maxillofacial Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

INTRODUCTION:Perioperative navigation is a recent addition to orthognathic surgery. This study aimed to evaluate the accuracy of anatomical landmarks-based registration. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eighty-five holes (1.2 mm diameter) were drilled in the surface of a plastic skull model, which was then scanned using a SkyView cone beam computed tomography scanner. DICOM files were imported into BrainLab ENT 3.0.0 to make a surgical plan. Six anatomical points were selected for registration: the infraorbital foramena, the anterior nasal spine, the crown tips of the upper canines, and the mesial contact point of the upper incisors. Each registration was performed five times by two separate observers (10 times total). RESULTS: The mean target registration error (TRE) in the anterior maxillary/zygomatic region was 0.93 ± 0.31 mm (p < 0.001 compared with other anatomical regions). The only statistically significant inter-observer difference of mean TRE was at the zygomatic arch, but was not clinically relevant. CONCLUSION: With six anatomical landmarks used, the mean TRE was clinically acceptable in the maxillary/zygomatic region. This registration technique may be used to access occlusal changes during bimaxillary surgery, but should be used with caution in other anatomical regions of the skull because of the large TRE observed. Perioperative navigation is a recent addition to orthognathic surgery. This study aimed to evaluate the accuracy of anatomical landmark-based registration. Materials and methods: Eighty-five holes (1.2 mm diameter) were drilled in the surface of a plastic skull model, which was then scanned using a SkyView cone beam computed tomography scanner. DICOM files were imported into BrainLab ENT 3.0.0 to make a surgical plan. Six anatomical points were selected for registration: the infraorbital foramena, the anterior nasal spine, the crown tips of the upper canines, and the mesial contact point of the upper incisors. Each registration was performed five times by two separate observers (10 times total). Results: The mean target registration error (TRE) in the anterior maxillary/zygomatic region was 0.93 ± 0.31 mm (p < 0.001 compared with other anatomical regions). The only statistically significant interobserver difference of mean TRE was at the zygomatic arch, but was not clinically relevant. Conclusion: With six anatomical landmarks used, the mean TRE was clinically acceptable in the maxillary/zygomatic region. This registration technique may be used to access occlusal changes during bimaxillary surgery, but should be used with caution in other anatomical regions of the skull because of the large TRE observed.

show abstract

“…Also, the use of computer-based surgery on the anatomically complex head and neck area allowed a more precise surgery on a larger scale. The use of 3D images and navigation system has greatly advanced surgeries from previous surgeries using 2D images (2). This technique makes it easier for the dentist or oral and maxillofacial surgeon to perform surgical extraction, and it is able to avoid unplanned bony cuts and adjacent teeth injury.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Recently, various methods are attempted to reduce the surgical error during actual surgery. In addition, the use of a computer-assisted navigation system (CANS) has been acknowledged to be exceptionally helpful in maxillofacial surgery, as it allows the monitoring of the instrument's movements in real-time (2). Additionally, only using the 3-D images also need to surgeon's experiences, because need to find accurate position of the purposed object or lesion.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Extraction of Impacted Supernumerary Teeth with Navigation System

Kim¹,

Yoo²,

Moon³

2016

Journal of International Society for Simulation Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Computer-aided navigation system is helpful in maxillofacial surgery with real time instrument positioning and clear anatomic identification. Generally, completely impacted tooth extraction surgery have e high risk by iatrogenic injury such as, adjacent tooth injury, normal anatomical structure injury. This case report describes performing extraction of impacted supernumerary teeth on anterior maxilla by using the navigation system in a 15 years old male patient.Key WordsZZComputer-aided surgery ㆍNavigation surgery ㆍExtraction ㆍImpacted teeth ㆍSupernemerary teeth.

show abstract

Does intraoperative navigation restore orbital dimensions in traumatic and post-ablative defects?

Cited by 69 publications

References 39 publications

Predictability in orbital reconstruction: A human cadaver study. Part II: Navigation-assisted orbital reconstruction

Predictability in orbital reconstruction: A human cadaver study. Part II: Navigation-assisted orbital reconstruction

Validation of anatomical landmarks-based registration for image-guided surgery: An in-vitro study

Extraction of Impacted Supernumerary Teeth with Navigation System

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About