Mathematical Methods for Assessing the Accuracy of Pre-planned and Guided Surgical Osteotomies

Overview

Journal Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg

Publisher Springer

Specialties General Surgery
Radiology

Date 2025 Feb 19

PMID 39969683

Authors

George R Nahass

Nicolas Kaplan

Isabel Scharf

Devansh Saini

Naji Bou Zeid

Sobhi Kazmouz

Linping Zhao

Lee W T Alkureishi

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Purpose: The fibula-free flap (FFF) is a valuable reconstructive technique in maxillofacial surgery; however, the assessment of osteotomy accuracy remains challenging. We devised two novel methodologies to compare planned and postoperative osteotomies in FFF reconstructions that minimized user input but would still generalize to other operations involving the analysis of osteotomies.

Methods: Our approaches leverage basic mathematics to derive both quantitative and qualitative insights about the relationship of the postoperative osteotomy to the planned model. We have coined our methods 'analysis by a shared reference angle' and 'Euler angle analysis.'

Results: In addition to describing our algorithm and the clinical utility, we present a thorough validation of both methods. Our algorithm is highly repeatable in an intraobserver repeatability test and provides information about the overall accuracy as well as geometric specifics of the deviation from the planned reconstruction.

Conclusion: Our algorithm is a novel and robust method for assessing the osteotomy accuracy of FFF reconstructions. This approach has no reliance on the overall position of the reconstruction, which is valuable due to the multiple factors that may influence the outcome of FFF reconstructions. Additionally, while our approach relies on anatomical features for landmark selections, the flexibility in our approach makes it applicable to evaluate any operation involving osteotomies.

References

Antunez-Conde R, Salmeron J, Diez-Montiel A, Agea M, Gascon D, Sada A . Mandibular Reconstruction With Fibula Flap and Dental Implants Through Virtual Surgical Planning and Three Different Techniques: Double-Barrel Flap, Implant Dynamic Navigation and CAD/CAM Mesh With Iliac Crest Graft. Front Oncol. 2021; 11:719712. PMC: 8525397. DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2021.719712. View

Bosc R, Meningaud J . Henri Mondor Experience with Microsurgical Head and Neck Reconstruction Failure. Clin Plast Surg. 2016; 43(4):695-706. DOI: 10.1016/j.cps.2016.05.008. View

Brown J, Lowe D, Kanatas A, Schache A . Mandibular reconstruction with vascularised bone flaps: a systematic review over 25 years. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2017; 55(2):113-126. DOI: 10.1016/j.bjoms.2016.12.010. View

Garcia-Mato D, Ochandiano S, Garcia-Sevilla M, Navarro-Cuellar C, Darriba-Alles J, Garcia-Leal R . Craniosynostosis surgery: workflow based on virtual surgical planning, intraoperative navigation and 3D printed patient-specific guides and templates. Sci Rep. 2019; 9(1):17691. PMC: 6881390. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-019-54148-4. View

Guo Y, Xu W, Tu P, Han J, Zhang C, Liu J . Design and implementation of a surgical planning system for robotic assisted mandible reconstruction with fibula free flap. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg. 2022; 17(12):2291-2303. DOI: 10.1007/s11548-022-02748-3. View

Kaplan N, Marques M, Scharf I, Yang K, Alkureishi L, Purnell C . Virtual Reality and Augmented Reality in Plastic and Craniomaxillofacial Surgery: A Scoping Review. Bioengineering (Basel). 2023; 10(4). PMC: 10136227. DOI: 10.3390/bioengineering10040480. View

Logan H, Wolfaardt J, Boulanger P, Hodgetts B, Seikaly H . Exploratory benchtop study evaluating the use of surgical design and simulation in fibula free flap mandibular reconstruction. J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2013; 42:42. PMC: 3729729. DOI: 10.1186/1916-0216-42-42. View

Politi M, Toro C . Iliac flap versus fibula flap in mandibular reconstruction. J Craniofac Surg. 2012; 23(3):774-9. DOI: 10.1097/SCS.0b013e31824dbd8a. View

Ren W, Gao L, Li S, Chen C, Li F, Wang Q . Virtual Planning and 3D printing modeling for mandibular reconstruction with fibula free flap. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2018; 23(3):e359-e366. PMC: 5945234. DOI: 10.4317/medoral.22295. View

10.

Roser S, Ramachandra S, Blair H, Grist W, Carlson G, Christensen A . The accuracy of virtual surgical planning in free fibula mandibular reconstruction: comparison of planned and final results. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2010; 68(11):2824-32. DOI: 10.1016/j.joms.2010.06.177. View

11.

Seier T, Hingsammer L, Schumann P, Gander T, Rucker M, Lanzer M . Virtual planning, simultaneous dental implantation and CAD/CAM plate fixation: a paradigm change in maxillofacial reconstruction. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2019; 49(7):854-861. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijom.2019.11.010. View

12.

Wilkman T, Apajalahti S, Wilkman E, Tornwall J, Lassus P . A Comparison of Bone Resorption Over Time: An Analysis of the Free Scapular, Iliac Crest, and Fibular Microvascular Flaps in Mandibular Reconstruction. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2016; 75(3):616-621. DOI: 10.1016/j.joms.2016.09.009. View

13.

Xiao D, Lian C, Deng H, Kuang T, Liu Q, Ma L . Estimating Reference Bony Shape Models for Orthognathic Surgical Planning Using 3D Point-Cloud Deep Learning. IEEE J Biomed Health Inform. 2021; 25(8):2958-2966. PMC: 8310896. DOI: 10.1109/JBHI.2021.3054494. View

14.

Yilmaz M, Vayvada H, Menderes A, Demirdover C, Kizilkaya A . A comparison of vascularized fibular flap and iliac crest flap for mandibular reconstruction. J Craniofac Surg. 2008; 19(1):227-34. DOI: 10.1097/scs.0b013e31815c942c. View