PLoS ONE (Jan 2016)

A New 3D Tool for Assessing the Accuracy of Bimaxillary Surgery: The OrthoGnathicAnalyser.

  • Frank Baan,
  • Jeroen Liebregts,
  • Tong Xi,
  • Ruud Schreurs,
  • Martien de Koning,
  • Stefaan Bergé,
  • Thomas Maal

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0149625
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 11, no. 2
p. e0149625

Abstract

Read online

AIM:The purpose of this study was to present and validate an innovative semi-automatic approach to quantify the accuracy of the surgical outcome in relation to 3D virtual orthognathic planning among patients who underwent bimaxillary surgery. MATERIAL AND METHOD:For the validation of this new semi-automatic approach, CBCT scans of ten patients who underwent bimaxillary surgery were acquired pre-operatively. Individualized 3D virtual operation plans were made for all patients prior to surgery. During surgery, the maxillary and mandibular segments were positioned as planned by using 3D milled interocclusal wafers. Consequently, post-operative CBCT scan were acquired. The 3D rendered pre- and postoperative virtual head models were aligned by voxel-based registration upon the anterior cranial base. To calculate the discrepancies between the 3D planning and the actual surgical outcome, the 3D planned maxillary and mandibular segments were segmented and superimposed upon the postoperative maxillary and mandibular segments. The translation matrices obtained from this registration process were translated into translational and rotational discrepancies between the 3D planning and the surgical outcome, by using the newly developed tool, the OrthoGnathicAnalyser. To evaluate the reproducibility of this method, the process was performed by two independent observers multiple times. RESULTS:Low intra-observer and inter-observer variations in measurement error (mean error 0.97) were found, supportive of the observer independent character of the OrthoGnathicAnalyser. The pitch of the maxilla and mandible showed the highest discrepancy between the 3D planning and the postoperative results, 2.72° and 2.75° respectively. CONCLUSION:This novel method provides a reproducible tool for the evaluation of bimaxillary surgery, making it possible to compare larger patient groups in an objective and time-efficient manner in order to optimize the current workflow in orthognathic surgery.