Document Server@UHasselt >
Research publications >
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
|Title: ||Evaluation of two dental registration-splint techniques for surgical navigation in cranio-maxillofacial surgery|
|Authors: ||Venosta, Dominik|
Kruse, Astrid L.
Graetz, Klaus W.
|Issue Date: ||2014|
|Publisher: ||CHURCHILL LIVINGSTONE|
|Citation: ||JOURNAL OF CRANIO-MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, 42 (5), p. 448-453|
|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.|
|ISI #: ||000338600400015|
|Type: ||Journal Contribution|
|Validation: ||ecoom, 2015|
|Appears in Collections: ||Research publications|
Files in This Item:
|published version||1.62 MB||Adobe PDF|
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.