Accuracy of a computer-aided surgical simulation protocol for orthognathic surgery: a prospective multicenter study.

PURPOSE The purpose of this prospective multicenter study was to assess the accuracy of a computer-aided surgical simulation (CASS) protocol for orthognathic surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS The accuracy of the CASS protocol was assessed by comparing planned outcomes with postoperative outcomes of 65 consecutive patients enrolled from 3 centers. Computer-generated surgical splints were used for all patients. For the genioplasty, 1 center used computer-generated chin templates to reposition the chin segment only for patients with asymmetry. Standard intraoperative measurements were used without the chin templates for the remaining patients. The primary outcome measurements were the linear and angular differences for the maxilla, mandible, and chin when the planned and postoperative models were registered at the cranium. The secondary outcome measurements were the maxillary dental midline difference between the planned and postoperative positions and the linear and angular differences of the chin segment between the groups with and without the use of the template. The latter were measured when the planned and postoperative models were registered at the mandibular body. Statistical analyses were performed, and the accuracy was reported using root mean square deviation (RMSD) and the Bland-Altman method for assessing measurement agreement. RESULTS In the primary outcome measurements, there was no statistically significant difference among the 3 centers for the maxilla and mandible. The largest RMSDs were 1.0 mm and 1.5° for the maxilla and 1.1 mm and 1.8° for the mandible. For the chin, there was a statistically significant difference between the groups with and without the use of the chin template. The chin template group showed excellent accuracy, with the largest positional RMSD of 1.0 mm and the largest orientation RMSD of 2.2°. However, larger variances were observed in the group not using the chin template. This was significant in the anteroposterior and superoinferior directions and the in pitch and yaw orientations. In the secondary outcome measurements, the RMSD of the maxillary dental midline positions was 0.9 mm. When registered at the body of the mandible, the linear and angular differences of the chin segment between the groups with and without the use of the chin template were consistent with the results found in the primary outcome measurements. CONCLUSIONS Using this computer-aided surgical simulation protocol, the computerized plan can be transferred accurately and consistently to the patient to position the maxilla and mandible at the time of surgery. The computer-generated chin template provides greater accuracy in repositioning the chin segment than the intraoperative measurements.

[1]  M S Cooke,et al.  Validity of cephalometric landmarks. An experimental study on human skulls. , 1994, European journal of orthodontics.

[2]  G. Swennen,et al.  The use of a new 3D splint and double CT scan procedure to obtain an accurate anatomic virtual augmented model of the skull. , 2007, International journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery.

[3]  Filip Schutyser,et al.  A New Method of 3-D Cephalometry Part I: The Anatomic Cartesian 3-D Reference System , 2006, The Journal of craniofacial surgery.

[4]  Jaime Gateno,et al.  Three-dimensional computer-aided surgical simulation for maxillofacial surgery. , 2005, Atlas of the oral and maxillofacial surgery clinics of North America.

[5]  R Kikinis,et al.  Development of a three-dimensional treatment planning system based on computed tomographic data. , 2002, International journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery.

[6]  O Donatsky,et al.  Computerized cephalometric evaluation of orthognathic surgical precision and stability in relation to maxillary superior repositioning combined with mandibular advancement or setback. , 1997, Journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery : official journal of the American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons.

[7]  Jaime Gateno,et al.  Cost-effectiveness analysis for computer-aided surgical simulation in complex cranio-maxillofacial surgery. , 2006, Journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery : official journal of the American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons.

[8]  Filip Schutyser,et al.  Three-dimensional cephalometry: spiral multi-slice vs cone-beam computed tomography. , 2006, American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics : official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics.

[9]  L. Kaban,et al.  Occlusal cant in the frontal plane as a reflection of facial asymmetry. , 1997, Journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery : official journal of the American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons.

[10]  J. Gateno,et al.  A comparison of 3 methods of face-bow transfer recording: implications for orthognathic surgery. , 2001, Journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery : official journal of the American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons.

[11]  Jaime Gateno,et al.  A new method to orient 3-dimensional computed tomography models to the natural head position: a clinical feasibility study. , 2011, Journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery : official journal of the American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons.

[12]  Jaime Gateno,et al.  Development of a Technique for Recording and Transferring Natural Head Position in 3 Dimensions , 2010, The Journal of craniofacial surgery.

[13]  Jaime Gateno,et al.  Clinical feasibility of computer-aided surgical simulation (CASS) in the treatment of complex cranio-maxillofacial deformities. , 2007, Journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery : official journal of the American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons.

[14]  J. English,et al.  Mosby's Orthodontic Review , 2008 .

[15]  E. Ellis,et al.  Sequencing bimaxillary surgery: mandible first. , 2011, Journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery : official journal of the American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons.

[16]  Jaime Gateno,et al.  Outcome study of computer-aided surgical simulation in the treatment of patients with craniomaxillofacial deformities. , 2011, Journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery : official journal of the American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons.

[17]  Jaime Gateno,et al.  Accuracy of the computer-aided surgical simulation (CASS) system in the treatment of patients with complex craniomaxillofacial deformity: A pilot study. , 2007, Journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery : official journal of the American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons.

[18]  Robert J. Havlik,et al.  Distraction Osteogenesis of the Facial Skeleton , 2008 .

[19]  J M Bland,et al.  Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement , 1986 .

[20]  Jaime Gateno,et al.  The precision of computer-generated surgical splints. , 2003, Journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery : official journal of the American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons.

[21]  Yu-Bing Chang,et al.  In vitro evaluation of new approach to digital dental model articulation. , 2012, Journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery : official journal of the American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons.

[22]  N Samman,et al.  Computer-assisted three-dimensional surgical planning and simulation: 3D virtual osteotomy. , 2000, International journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery.

[23]  E Ellis,et al.  Accuracy of face-bow transfer: effect on surgical prediction and postsurgical result. , 1992, Journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery : official journal of the American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons.

[24]  Thiam-huat. Tng,et al.  Validity of cephalometric landmarks , 1991 .

[25]  Proffit Wr,et al.  The prevalence of facial asymmetry in the dentofacial deformities population at the University of North Carolina. , 1997 .

[26]  G. Santler,et al.  Stereolithography versus milled three-dimensional models: comparison of production method, indication, and accuracy. , 1998, Computer aided surgery : official journal of the International Society for Computer Aided Surgery.

[27]  A. Beckett,et al.  AKUFO AND IBARAPA. , 1965, Lancet.

[28]  Jaime Gateno,et al.  New protocol for 1-stage treatment of temporomandibular joint ankylosis using surgical navigation. , 2007, Journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery : official journal of the American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons.

[29]  W. Bell,et al.  Modern practice in orthognathic and reconstructive surgery , 1993 .

[30]  Filip Schutyser,et al.  The Use of a Wax Bite Wafer and a Double Computed Tomography Scan Procedure to Obtain a Three-Dimensional Augmented Virtual Skull Model , 2007, The Journal of craniofacial surgery.

[31]  Jaime Gateno,et al.  New clinical protocol to evaluate craniomaxillofacial deformity and plan surgical correction. , 2009, Journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery : official journal of the American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons.

[32]  R. Bell,et al.  Computer planning and intraoperative navigation in orthognathic surgery. , 2011, Journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery : official journal of the American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons.

[33]  Filip Schutyser,et al.  Three-dimensional treatment planning of orthognathic surgery in the era of virtual imaging. , 2009, Journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery : official journal of the American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons.

[34]  G. Santler,et al.  3-D COSMOS: a new 3-D model based computerised operation simulation and navigation system. , 2000, Journal of cranio-maxillo-facial surgery : official publication of the European Association for Cranio-Maxillo-Facial Surgery.

[35]  Jaime Gateno,et al.  A new technique for the creation of a computerized composite skull model. , 2003, Journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery : official journal of the American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons.