Validation of 3D-laser surface registration for image-guided cranio-maxillofacial surgery

Hoffmann, Jürgen; Westendorff, Carsten; Leitner, Christoph; Bartz, Dirk; Reinert, Siegmar

doi:10.1016/j.jcms.2004.10.001

Cited by 73 publications

(63 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Our results are also comparable with those for other registration methods such as laser surface scanning, boneimplanted fiduciary markers, and anatomical structures (Schlaier et al, 2002;Marmulla et al, 2004a;Hoffmann et al, 2005b;Hardy et al, 2006;Pham et al, 2007). The use of a CBCT dataset seems to lead to the same results as those obtained with a CT dataset (Eggers et al, 2009).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 82%

“…Several methods have been used to solve the registration problem. They can be split into two groups: markerbased registration (Altobelli et al, 1993;Hassfeld et al, 1995;Howard et al, 1995;Schramm et al, 1999;Luebbers et al, 2008) and marker-free registration (Troitzsch et al, 2003;Marmulla et al, 2004a;Hoffmann et al, 2005b;Marmulla et al, 2005;Luebbers et al, 2008).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In contrast to these marker-based methods, marker-free registration relies on the patient's craniofacial anatomy itself. One approach is to register defined bone protuberances, for example, the anterior nasal spine (Swennen et al, 2006), to the corresponding structures apparent in CT bone scans (Grevers et al, 2002;Marmulla et al, 2004b;Hoffmann et al, 2005b). Another marker-free registration technique is laser surface scanning.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Previous studies have evaluated general precision (Schlaier et al, 2002;Hoffmann et al, 2005b;Metzger et al, 2007) and concentrated on navigation precision in the maxillary and periorbital region (Marmulla et al, 2004b;Marmulla et al, 2004a;Hardy et al, 2006) or precision in the cranium (Luebbers et al, 2008).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Point-to-point registration with mandibulo-maxillary splint in open and closed jaw position. Evaluation of registration accuracy for computer-aided surgery of the mandible

Bettschart

Kruse

Matthews

et al. 2012

Journal of Cranio-Maxillofacial Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

INTRODUCTION:Computer navigation plays an increasingly important role in craniomaxillofacial surgery. The difficulties in computer navigation at the craniomaxillofacial site lie in the accurate transmission of the dataset to the operating room. This study investigates the accuracy of the dental-splint registration method for the skull, midface, and mandible. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A synthetic human skull model was prepared with landmarks and scanned with cone beam computer tomography (CBCT). Two registration splints fixed the mandible against the viscerocranium in two different positions (closed vs. open). The target registration error was computed in all 278 landmarks spread over the entire skull and mandible in 10 repeated measurements using the VectorVision(2) (Brain-LAB Inc., Feldkirchen, Germany) navigation system. RESULTS: If registered in the closed position an average precision of 2.07mm with a standard deviation (SD) of 0.78mm was computed for all landmarks distributed over the whole skull. Registration in the open position resulted in an average precision of 1.53mm (SD=0.55mm). For single landmarks the precision decreases linearly with distance from the reference markers. The longer the three-dimensional distance between the registration points, the more precise the computer navigation is, mainly in the most posterior area of the cranium. CONCLUSION: Our findings in the cranium are comparable with those of other studies. Artificial fixation of the lower jaw via splint seems to introduce no additional error. The registration points should be as far apart from each other as possible during navigation with the splint.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 82%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Point-to-point registration with mandibulo-maxillary splint in open and closed jaw position. Evaluation of registration accuracy for computer-aided surgery of the mandible

Bettschart

Kruse

Matthews

et al. 2012

Journal of Cranio-Maxillofacial Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…They can be divided into the two subsets, marker-based (Altobelli et al, 1993;Hassfeld et al, 1995;Howard et al, 1995;Schramm et al, 1999) and markerfree procedures (Troitzsch et al, 2003;Marmulla et al, 2004b;Hoffmann et al, 2005;Marmulla et al, 2005b), which do not need any artificial landmarks. The markerbased registration techniques described to date employ bone-implanted screws (Sinikovic et al, 2007), fiducials fixed to a dental splint (Schramm et al, 2001), or reference markers glued to the skin (Alp et al, 1998;Hardy et al, 2006).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Registration for computer-navigated surgery in edentulous patients: A problem-based decision concept

Lübbers

Matthews

Zemann

et al. 2011

Journal of Cranio-Maxillofacial Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND: Surgical navigation is a commonly used tool in cranio-maxillofacial surgery. Registration is the key element for precision, and a number of studies have shown different techniques to be accurate. Nonetheless, uncertainty surrounds the special situation in edentulous patients and a practical approach to what can be a challenging problem. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Four registration strategies for the Brainlab VectorVision(2) system are presented for surgical navigation of edentulous patients: three landmark-based, point-to-point techniques and one surface-based matching strategy are evaluated. RESULTS: The methods described differ in overall accuracy as well as in the region covered. In general, the more time-consuming and invasive the technique, the more precise it is. The non-invasive techniques are less precise, and they cover only small regions with sufficient accuracy. CONCLUSIONS: Taking into account which type of accuracy is clinically relevant and that the whole skull does not always need to be covered with the greatest possible accuracy, all the described techniques have their indications. The simpler and less invasive techniques can spare time, decrease costs, and harm patient. A decision tree is presented to the reader.

show abstract

Referencing of markerless CT data sets with cone beam subvolume including registration markers to ease computer‐assisted surgery ‐ A clinical and technical research

Essig

Rana

Kokemueller

et al. 2012

Robotics Computer Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Validation of 3D-laser surface registration for image-guided cranio-maxillofacial surgery

Cited by 73 publications

References 26 publications

Point-to-point registration with mandibulo-maxillary splint in open and closed jaw position. Evaluation of registration accuracy for computer-aided surgery of the mandible

Point-to-point registration with mandibulo-maxillary splint in open and closed jaw position. Evaluation of registration accuracy for computer-aided surgery of the mandible

Registration for computer-navigated surgery in edentulous patients: A problem-based decision concept

Referencing of markerless CT data sets with cone beam subvolume including registration markers to ease computer‐assisted surgery ‐ A clinical and technical research

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About