Document Server@UHasselt >
Research >
Research publications >

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/1942/18758

Title: Evaluation of two dental registration-splint techniques for surgical navigation in cranio-maxillofacial surgery
Authors: Venosta, Dominik
Matthews, Felix
Kruse, Astrid L.
Lanzer, Martin
Gander, Thomas
Graetz, Klaus W.
Luebbers, Heinz-Theo
Issue Date: 2014
Abstract: Background: Surgical navigation requires precise registration of the pre-operative image dataset to the patient in the operation theatre. Different marker-based and marker-free registration techniques are available, each of them with advantages and disadvantages regarding precision and clinical handling. In this model study, the precision of two dental splint techniques for marker-based registration is analyzed. Materials and methods: A synthetic full-size human skull was registered with its cone beam computed tomography dataset using (a) a dentally-mounted "rapid" occlusal splint with five titanium screws directly attached to the splint, (b) an "extender", a dentally-mounted occlusal splint with similar fiducials fixed to an extension of the splint. The target registration error was measured for 170 landmarks distributed over the viscero- and neurocranium in 10 repeats per splint type using the Vector Vision(2) (BrainLAB AG, Heimstetten, Germany) navigation system. Statistical and graphical evaluations were performed per anatomical region. Results: In the periorbital region, the rapid splint, with an average deviation of 1.50 mm (SD = 0.439) showed greater accuracy than the extender with 1.76 mm (SD = 0.525). The viscerocranial results for both splints were similar (extender 1.84 mm, SD = 0.559, rapid occlusal splint 1.86 mm, SD = 0.686). In the cranial vault region, registration with the extender (2.33 mm, SD = 0.685) proved to be more precise than with the rapid splint (2.86 mm, SD = 0.929). Conclusions: Due to the more compact dimension of the rapid occlusal splint, errors close to the splint were smaller compared to the extender technique. The advantage of greater distances between the registration fiducials on the extender is particularly important in areas such as the orbital roof, the cranial vault, and the lateral skull base. (C) 2013 European Association for Cranio-Maxillo-Facial Surgery. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Notes: [Venosta, Dominik; Kruse, Astrid L.; Lanzer, Martin; Gander, Thomas; Graetz, Klaus W.; Luebbers, Heinz-Theo] Univ Zurich Hosp, Clin Craniomaxillofacial Surg, CH-8091 Zurich, Switzerland. [Sun, Yi] St Johns Hosp, B-3600 Genk, Belgium. [Sun, Yi] Hasselt Univ, Fac Med, Diepenbeek, Belgium. [Matthews, Felix; Luebbers, Heinz-Theo] Harvard Univ, Surg Planning Lab, Brigham & Womens Hosp, Sch Med, Boston, MA 02115 USA.
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/1942/18758
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcms.2013.05.040
ISI #: 000338600400015
ISSN: 1010-5182
Category: A1
Type: Journal Contribution
Validation: ecoom, 2015
Appears in Collections: Research publications

Files in This Item:

Description SizeFormat
published version1.62 MBAdobe PDF

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.