nach oben

Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery

Erschienen in:

24.10.2022 | Original Article

On the use of intraoperative 3D-RX C-arm imaging in orthognathic surgery: a prospective non-consecutive case series study

verfasst von: Nikolas K. G. De Meurechy, Christopher Decoste, Maurice Y. Mommaerts

Erschienen in: Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery | Ausgabe 1/2024

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Context

Segment and osteosynthesis malposition resulting in patients’ complaints (mainly about asymmetries) are encountered in orthofacial/orthognathic surgery.

Objective, design, and setting

We planned to investigate the usefulness of intraoperative three-dimensional (3D) imaging concerning positioning and fixation of bone segments and osteosynthesis in orthognathic/orthofacial surgery. We performed a prospective study of non-consecutive cases. All patients receiving a bimaxillary osteotomy, genioplasty, and their combinations were included in the study from May 2016 to May 2020. Unilateral and bilateral sagittal split osteotomies were excluded. There were no gender and age limitations. All were intraoperatively examined using the BV Pulsera 3D-RX System (Philips Medical, Eindhoven, The Netherlands). The outcome variables were the percentage of revisions of segment positioning and osteosynthesis. Predictor variables were age, gender, type of surgery, timing (pre- and post-imaging), and surgeon experience (senior vs assistant).

Results

Forty female and twenty-two male patients were included (mean age 25.25 years ± 7.52 and 29.1 years ± 12.6 respectively). We evaluated 27 genioplasties and 34 Le Fort “type-I” osteotomies. Indications for segment repositioning and redo-osteosynthesis increased after intraoperative imaging as compared to operator’s clinical judgment before intraoperative imaging (95% confidence interval; p < .001 and p = .002 respectively).

Conclusion

Suboptimal positioning and fixation of bone segments or osteosynthesis were more apparent with 3D imaging. In addition, some satisfactory cases were also revised for an optimal outcome. As a result, surgeons were prompted to more revisions than judged necessary without intraoperative imaging.

Carrao V, Tofigh M, Greenberg A (2018) Virtual surgical planning for orthognathic surgery. In: Greenberg A (ed) Digital Technologies in Craniomaxillofacial Surgery, 1st edn. Springer, New York, New York, pp 117–155CrossRef

Stokbro K, Aagaard E, Torkov P et al (2014) Virtual planning in orthognathic surgery. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 43:957–965. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijom.2014.03.011CrossRefPubMed

Plooij JM, Maal TJJ, Haers P et al (2011) Digital three-dimensional image fusion processes for planning and evaluating orthodontics and orthognathic surgery. A systematic review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 40:341–352. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijom.2010.10.013CrossRefPubMed

Swennen GRJ, Mollemans W, Schutyser F (2009) Three-dimensional treatment planning of orthognathic surgery in the era of virtual imaging. J oral Maxillofac Surg Off J Am Assoc Oral Maxillofac Surg 67:2080–2092. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2009.06.007CrossRef

Schneider D, Kämmerer PW, Hennig M et al (2019) Customized virtual surgical planning in bimaxillary orthognathic surgery: a prospective randomized trial. Clin Oral Investig 23:3115–3122. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-018-2732-3CrossRefPubMed

Moerenhout BAMML, Gelaude F, Swennen GRJ et al (2009) Accuracy and repeatability of cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) measurements used in the determination of facial indices in the laboratory setup. J cranio-maxillo-facial Surg Off Publ Eur Assoc Cranio-Maxillo-Facial Surg 37:18–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcms.2008.07.006CrossRef

Swennen GRJ, Mommaerts MY, Abeloos J et al (2009) A cone-beam CT based technique to augment the 3D virtual skull model with a detailed dental surface. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 38:48–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijom.2008.11.006CrossRefPubMed

Bianchi A, Muyldermans L, Di Martino M et al (2010) Facial soft tissue esthetic predictions: validation in craniomaxillofacial surgery with cone beam computed tomography data. J oral Maxillofac Surg Off J Am Assoc Oral Maxillofac Surg 68:1471–1479. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2009.08.006CrossRef

Wu T-Y, Lin H-H, Lo L-J, Ho C-T (2017) Postoperative outcomes of two- and three-dimensional planning in orthognathic surgery: a comparative study. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 70:1101–1111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjps.2017.04.012CrossRefPubMed

10.

Zinser MJ, Mischkowski RA, Sailer HF, Zöller JE (2012) Computer-assisted orthognathic surgery: feasibility study using multiple CAD/CAM surgical splints. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol 113:673–687. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oooo.2011.11.009CrossRefPubMed

11.

Wrzosek MK, Peacock ZS, Laviv A et al (2016) Comparison of time required for traditional versus virtual orthognathic surgery treatment planning. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 45:1065–1069. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijom.2016.03.012CrossRefPubMed

12.

Lin H-H, Lo L-J (2015) Three-dimensional computer-assisted surgical simulation and intraoperative navigation in orthognathic surgery: a literature review. J Formos Med Assoc 114:300–307. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfma.2015.01.017CrossRefPubMed

13.

Bell R (2010) Computer planning and intraoperative navigation in cranio-maxillofacial surgery. Oral Maxillofac Surg Clin North Am 22:135–156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coms.2009.10.010CrossRefPubMed

14.

Chang H-W, Lin H-H, Chortrakarnkij P et al (2015) Intraoperative navigation for single-splint two-jaw orthognathic surgery: from model to actual surgery. J cranio-maxillo-facial Surg Off Publ Eur Assoc Cranio-Maxillo-Facial Surg 43:1119–1126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcms.2015.06.009CrossRef

15.

Badiali G, Roncari A, Bianchi A et al (2015) Navigation in orthognathic surgery: 3D accuracy. Facial Plast Surg 31:463–473. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0035-1564716CrossRefPubMed

16.

Sukegawa S, Kanno T, Furuki Y (2018) Application of computer-assisted navigation systems in oral and maxillofacial surgery. Jpn Dent Sci Rev 54:139–149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdsr.2018.03.005CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

17.

Hohlweg-Majert B, Schön R, Schmelzeisen R et al (2005) Navigational maxillofacial surgery using virtual models. World J Surg 29:1530–1538. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-005-0091-0CrossRefPubMed

18.

Sun Y, Luebbers H-T, Agbaje JO et al (2013) Validation of anatomical landmarks-based registration for image-guided surgery: an in-vitro study. J cranio-maxillo-facial Surg Off Publ Eur Assoc Cranio-Maxillo-Facial Surg 41:522–526. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcms.2012.11.017CrossRef

19.

Azarmehr I, Stokbro K, Bell RB, Thygesen T (2017) Surgical navigation: a systematic review of indications, treatments, and outcomes in oral and maxillofacial surgery. J oral Maxillofac Surg Off J Am Assoc Oral Maxillofac Surg 75:1987–2005. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2017.01.004CrossRef

20.

Pohlenz P, Blessmann M, Blake F et al (2008) Major mandibular surgical procedures as an indication for intraoperative imaging. J oral Maxillofac Surg Off J Am Assoc Oral Maxillofac Surg 66:324–329. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2007.03.032CrossRef

21.

Chen R-F, Chen C-T, Hao Chen C et al (2010) Optimizing closed reduction of nasal and zygomatic arch fractures with a mobile fluoroscan. Plast Reconstr Surg 126:554–563. https://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0b013e3181de22b3CrossRefPubMed

22.

Kumar LKS, Peranthodi J, Divakaran DS, Tharakan M (2017) Application of C-arm for intra operative radiographic support in oral and maxillofacial surgical procedures under general anaesthesia. J Clin Diagn Res 11:ZL01–ZL02. https://doi.org/10.7860/JCDR/2017/28180.10840CrossRef

23.

Majumdar SK, Barman D, Chadda D et al (2020) Intraoperative image-guided retrieval of foreign body from infratemporal fossa: a rare case report. J Maxillofac Oral Surg 19:47–49CrossRefPubMed

24.

Cho Y-C, Jang S-M, Park S-W et al (2011) Removal of foreign body on cheek using endoscope and C-arm fluoroscopy. J Korean Assoc Oral Maxillofac Surg 37:234. https://doi.org/10.5125/jkaoms.2011.37.3.234CrossRef

25.

Kang Y-H, Byun J-H, Choi M-J, Park B-W (2014) Successful localization of intraoral foreign body with C-arm fluoroscopy. Maxillofac Plast Reconstr Surg 36:219–223. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12663-019-01237-6CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

26.

Boutros S, Shetye P, Carter C et al (2008) Intraoperative fluoroscopic verification of condylar position in orthognathic surgery. Plast Reconstr Surg 121:1781–1784. https://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0b013e31816a9f5aCrossRefPubMed

27.

Pohlenz P, Blake F, Blessmann M et al (2009) Intraoperative cone-beam computed tomography in oral and maxillofacial surgery using a C-arm prototype: first clinical experiences after treatment of zygomaticomaxillary complex fractures. J oral Maxillofac Surg Off J Am Assoc Oral Maxillofac Surg 67:515–521. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2008.06.086CrossRef

28.

Wilde F, Lorenz K, Ebner A-K et al (2013) Intraoperative imaging with a 3D C-arm system after zygomatico-orbital complex fracture reduction. J oral Maxillofac Surg Off J Am Assoc Oral Maxillofac Surg 71:894–910. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2012.10.031CrossRef

29.

Heiland M, Schmelzle R, Hebecker A, Schulze D (2004) Intraoperative 3D imaging of the facial skeleton using the SIREMOBIL Iso-C3D. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 33:130–132. https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr/15309653CrossRefPubMed

30.

Klatt J-C, Heiland M, Marx S et al (2013) Clinical indication for intraoperative 3D imaging during open reduction of fractures of the mandibular angle. J cranio-maxillo-facial Surg Off Publ Eur Assoc Cranio-Maxillo-Facial Surg 41:e87-90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcms.2012.11.024CrossRef

31.

Wilde F, Schramm A (2014) Intraoperative imaging in orbital and midface reconstruction. Facial Plast Surg 30:545–553. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0034-1393700CrossRefPubMed

32.

Guijarro-Martínez R, Gellrich N-C, Witte J et al (2014) Optimization of the interface between radiology, surgery, radiotherapy, and pathology in head and neck tumor surgery: a navigation-assisted multidisciplinary network. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 43:156–162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijom.2013.09.005CrossRefPubMed

33.

Muhanna N, Douglas CM, Daly MJ et al (2019) The image-guided operating room-utility and impact on surgeon’s performance in the head and neck surgery. Head Neck 41:3372–3382. https://doi.org/10.1002/hed.25864CrossRefPubMed

34.

Assouline SL, Meyer C, Weber E et al (2021) How useful is intraoperative cone beam computed tomography in maxillofacial surgery? An overview of the current literature. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 50:198–204. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijom.2020.05.006CrossRefPubMed

35.

van Hout WMMT, Van Cann EM, Muradin MSM et al (2014) Intraoperative imaging for the repair of zygomaticomaxillary complex fractures: a comprehensive review of the literature. J cranio-maxillo-facial Surg Off Publ Eur Assoc Cranio-Maxillo-Facial Surg 42:1918–1923. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcms.2014.07.012CrossRef

36.

Yarboro SR, Richter PH, Kahler DM (2017) The evolution of 3D imaging in orthopedic trauma care. Unfallchirurg 120:5–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00113-016-0226-9CrossRefPubMed

37.

Selles CA, Beerekamp MSH, Leenhouts PA et al (2020) The value of intraoperative 3-dimensional fluoroscopy in the treatment of distal radius fractures: a randomized clinical trial. J Hand Surg Am 45:189–195. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhsa.2019.11.006CrossRefPubMed

38.

Beerekamp MSH, Backes M, Schep NWL et al (2017) Effects of intra-operative fluoroscopic 3D-imaging on peri-operative imaging strategy in calcaneal fracture surgery. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 137:1667–1675. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-017-2787-7CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

39.

Richter M, Zech S (2009) Intraoperative 3-dimensional imaging in foot and ankle trauma-experience with a second-generation device (ARCADIS-3D). J Orthop Trauma 23:213–220. https://doi.org/10.1097/BOT.0b013e31819867f6CrossRefPubMed

40.

Manson PN, Markowitz B, Mirvis S et al (1990) Toward CT-based facial fracture treatment. Plast Reconstr Surg 85:202–204CrossRefPubMed

41.

Sedgwick P, Greenwood N (2015) Understanding the Hawthorne effect. BMJ 351:h4672. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.h4672CrossRefPubMed

42.

Demetriou C, Hu L, Smith TO, Hing CB (2019) Hawthorne effect on surgical studies. ANZ J Surg 89:1567–1576. https://doi.org/10.1111/ans.15475CrossRefPubMed

43.

McCarney R, Warner J, Iliffe S et al (2007) The Hawthorne effect: a randomised, controlled trial. BMC Med Res Methodol 7:30. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-7-30CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

44.

Zimmerer RM, Gellrich N-C (2020) 1.3 - Intraoperative imaging and postoperative quality control. In: Dorafshar AH, Rodriguez ED, Manson PNBT-FTS (eds). Elsevier, London, pp 32–43

45.

Shaye DA, Tollefson TT, Strong EB (2015) Use of intraoperative computed tomography for maxillofacial reconstructive surgery. JAMA Facial Plast Surg 17:113–119. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamafacial.2014.1343CrossRefPubMed

46.

Scolozzi P, Terzic A (2011) “Mirroring” computational planning, navigation guidance system, and intraoperative mobile C-arm cone-beam computed tomography with flat-panel detector: a new rationale in primary and secondary treatment of midfacial fractures? J oral Maxillofac Surg Off J Am Assoc Oral Maxillofac Surg 69:1697–1707. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2010.07.049CrossRef

47.

Huang AJ, Chang CY, Thomas BJ et al (2015) Using cone-beam CT as a low-dose 3D imaging technique for the extremities: initial experience in 50 subjects. Skeletal Radiol 44:797–809. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00256-015-2105-9CrossRefPubMed

48.

Heiland M, Pohlenz P, Blessmann M et al (2008) Navigated implantation after microsurgical bone transfer using intraoperatively acquired cone-beam computed tomography data sets. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 37:70–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijom.2007.06.011CrossRefPubMed

Titel: On the use of intraoperative 3D-RX C-arm imaging in orthognathic surgery: a prospective non-consecutive case series study
verfasst von: Nikolas K. G. De Meurechy
Christopher Decoste
Maurice Y. Mommaerts
Publikationsdatum: 24.10.2022
Verlag: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in: Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery / Ausgabe 1/2024
Print ISSN: 1865-1550
Elektronische ISSN: 1865-1569
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10006-022-01119-1

Neu im Fachgebiet Chirurgie

Häusliche Gewalt in der orthopädischen Notaufnahme oft nicht erkannt

28.05.2024 Häusliche Gewalt Nachrichten

In der Notaufnahme wird die Chance, Opfer von häuslicher Gewalt zu identifizieren, von Orthopäden und Orthopädinnen offenbar zu wenig genutzt. Darauf deuten die Ergebnisse einer Fragebogenstudie an der Sahlgrenska-Universität in Schweden hin.

Fehlerkultur in der Medizin – Offenheit zählt!

28.05.2024 Fehlerkultur Podcast

Darüber reden und aus Fehlern lernen, sollte das Motto in der Medizin lauten. Und zwar nicht nur im Sinne der Patientensicherheit. Eine negative Fehlerkultur kann auch die Behandelnden ernsthaft krank machen, warnt Prof. Dr. Reinhard Strametz. Ein Plädoyer und ein Leitfaden für den offenen Umgang mit kritischen Ereignissen in Medizin und Pflege.

Mehr Frauen im OP – weniger postoperative Komplikationen

21.05.2024 Allgemeine Chirurgie Nachrichten

Ein Frauenanteil von mindestens einem Drittel im ärztlichen Op.-Team war in einer großen retrospektiven Studie aus Kanada mit einer signifikanten Reduktion der postoperativen Morbidität assoziiert.

TAVI versus Klappenchirurgie: Neue Vergleichsstudie sorgt für Erstaunen

21.05.2024 TAVI Nachrichten

Bei schwerer Aortenstenose und obstruktiver KHK empfehlen die Leitlinien derzeit eine chirurgische Kombi-Behandlung aus Klappenersatz plus Bypass-OP. Diese Empfehlung wird allerdings jetzt durch eine aktuelle Studie infrage gestellt – mit überraschender Deutlichkeit.

Update Chirurgie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

Newsletter bestellen

Aktuelle BDC Leitlinien-Webinare

S3-Leitlinie „Diagnostik und Therapie des Karpaltunnelsyndroms“

Karpaltunnelsyndrom BDC Leitlinien Webinare

CME: 2 Punkte

Das Karpaltunnelsyndrom ist die häufigste Kompressionsneuropathie peripherer Nerven. Obwohl die Anamnese mit dem nächtlichen Einschlafen der Hand (Brachialgia parästhetica nocturna) sehr typisch ist, ist eine klinisch-neurologische Untersuchung und Elektroneurografie in manchen Fällen auch eine Neurosonografie erforderlich. Im Anfangsstadium sind konservative Maßnahmen (Handgelenksschiene, Ergotherapie) empfehlenswert. Bei nicht Ansprechen der konservativen Therapie oder Auftreten von neurologischen Ausfällen ist eine Dekompression des N. medianus am Karpaltunnel indiziert.

Prof. Dr. med. Gregor Antoniadis

S2e-Leitlinie „Distale Radiusfraktur“

Radiusfraktur BDC Leitlinien Webinare

CME: 2 Punkte

Das Webinar beschäftigt sich mit Fragen und Antworten zu Diagnostik und Klassifikation sowie Möglichkeiten des Ausschlusses von Zusatzverletzungen. Die Referenten erläutern, welche Frakturen konservativ behandelt werden können und wie. Das Webinar beantwortet die Frage nach aktuellen operativen Therapiekonzepten: Welcher Zugang, welches Osteosynthesematerial? Auf was muss bei der Nachbehandlung der distalen Radiusfraktur geachtet werden?

PD Dr. med. Oliver Pieske

Dr. med. Benjamin Meyknecht

S1-Leitlinie „Empfehlungen zur Therapie der akuten Appendizitis bei Erwachsenen“

Appendizitis BDC Leitlinien Webinare

CME: 2 Punkte

Inhalte des Webinars zur S1-Leitlinie „Empfehlungen zur Therapie der akuten Appendizitis bei Erwachsenen“ sind die Darstellung des Projektes und des Erstellungswegs zur S1-Leitlinie, die Erläuterung der klinischen Relevanz der Klassifikation EAES 2015, die wissenschaftliche Begründung der wichtigsten Empfehlungen und die Darstellung stadiengerechter Therapieoptionen.

Dr. med. Mihailo Andric

Live-Webinar "Urologie und Sexualmedizin in der Praxis"

Springer Medizin

On the use of intraoperative 3D-RX C-arm imaging in orthognathic surgery: a prospective non-consecutive case series study

Abstract

Context

Objective, design, and setting

Results

Conclusion

Neu im Fachgebiet Chirurgie

Häusliche Gewalt in der orthopädischen Notaufnahme oft nicht erkannt

Fehlerkultur in der Medizin – Offenheit zählt!

Mehr Frauen im OP – weniger postoperative Komplikationen

TAVI versus Klappenchirurgie: Neue Vergleichsstudie sorgt für Erstaunen

Update Chirurgie

Aktuelle BDC Leitlinien-Webinare

S3-Leitlinie „Diagnostik und Therapie des Karpaltunnelsyndroms“

S2e-Leitlinie „Distale Radiusfraktur“

S1-Leitlinie „Empfehlungen zur Therapie der akuten Appendizitis bei Erwachsenen“

Live-Webinar "Urologie und Sexualmedizin in der Praxis"

Springer Medizin

Abstract

Context

Objective, design, and setting

Results

Conclusion

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 1/2024

Neurofibromatosis type 1-associated plexiform neurofibromas of the neck: topography of lesions and surgical treatment data of 69 patients

Pseudogout growing from the temporomandibular joint into the middle cranial fossa

Nutritional management of chyle leak after head and neck surgery: a systematic review and proposed protocol for management

Biological marker for the establishment of periodontal disease: cross-sectional study in the gingival tissue

The surgical outcomes of anterior segmental osteotomy in Asian skeletal class II patients

3-dimensional analysis of nasal soft tissue alterations following maxillary Lefort I advancement with and without impaction using 3D photogrammetry scanner

Update Chirurgie