» Articles » PMID: 18280173

Comparison of Different Registration Methods for Surgical Navigation in Cranio-maxillofacial Surgery

Overview
Publisher Elsevier
Date 2008 Feb 19
PMID 18280173
Citations 49
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Surgical navigation requires registration of the pre-operative image dataset with the patient in the operation theatre. Various marker and marker-free registration techniques are available, each bearing an individual level of precision and clinical practicability. In this study the precision of four different registration methods in a maxillofacial surgical setting is analyzed.

Materials And Methods: A synthetic full size human skull model was registered with its computer tomography-dataset using (a) a dentally mounted occlusal splint, (b) the laser surface scanning, (c) five facial bone implants and (d) a combination of dental splint and two orbital bone implants. The target registration error was computed for 170 landmarks spread over the entire viscero- and neurocranium in 10 repeats using the VectorVision2 (BrainLAB AG, Heimstetten, Germany) navigation system. Statistical and graphical analyses were performed by anatomical region.

Results: An average precision of 1mm was found for the periorbital region irrespective of registration method (range 0.6-1.1mm). Beyond the mid-face, precision linearly decreases with the distance from the reference markers. The combination of splint with two orbital bone markers significantly improved precision from 1.3 to 0.8mm (p<0.001) on the viscerocranium and 2.3-1.2mm (p<0.001) on the neurocranium.

Conclusions: An occlusal splint alone yields poor precision for navigation beyond the mid-face. The precision can be increased by combining an occlusal splint with just two bone implants inserted percutaneously on the lateral orbital rim of each side.

Citing Articles

The learning curve of a dynamic navigation system used in endodontic apical surgery.

Liu S, Peng L, Zhao Y, Han B, Wang X, Wang Z J Dent Sci. 2024; 19(4):2247-2255.

PMID: 39347078 PMC: 11437302. DOI: 10.1016/j.jds.2024.02.016.


Noctopus: a novel device and method for patient registration and navigation in image-guided cranial surgery.

Ozbek Y, Bardosi Z, Freysinger W Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg. 2024; 19(12):2371-2380.

PMID: 38748051 PMC: 11607009. DOI: 10.1007/s11548-024-03135-w.


Custom CAD/CAM Peek Implants for Complex Orbitocranial Reconstruction: Our Experience with 15 Patients.

Cardenas-Serres C, Almeida-Parra F, Simon-Flors A, de Leyva-Moreno P, Ranz-Colio A, Ley-Urzaiz L J Clin Med. 2024; 13(3).

PMID: 38337393 PMC: 10856719. DOI: 10.3390/jcm13030695.


Proposal and Validation of a New Nonradiological Method for Postoperative Three-Dimensional Implant Position Analysis Based on the Dynamic Navigation System: An In Vitro Study.

Ma F, Liu M, Liu X, Wei T, Liu L, Sun F J Pers Med. 2023; 13(2).

PMID: 36836596 PMC: 9960986. DOI: 10.3390/jpm13020362.


Influence of surgical position and registration methods on clinical accuracy of navigation systems in brain tumor surgery.

Furuse M, Ikeda N, Kawabata S, Park Y, Takeuchi K, Fukumura M Sci Rep. 2023; 13(1):2644.

PMID: 36788314 PMC: 9929322. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-023-29710-w.