Ultrasound-Guided Navigation System for Orthognathic Surgery
- 592 Downloads
Around 1–2 % of the US population has craniofacial deformities severe enough to be disabling and stigmatizing, and could benefit from orthognathic surgery. This surgery involves repositioning the jaws, due to the unique features of each patient’s teeth, jaws, and joint. Approximately 20 % of patients who had mandibular advancement surgery experience moderate relapse 1–5 years after surgery. We believe ultrasound is a promising imaging technology for orthognathic surgery guidance that can assist surgeons to visualize the condyle/ramus segment in order to guide it into its pre-surgical, biologically stable position. This paper explores the role of 3D ultrasound imaging as a real-time surgical guidance to improve treatment outcomes for orthognathic surgery. This paper shows our work designing a 3D ultrasound volume reconstruction system and our results demonstrating its ability to capture the bony structures of the mandible, compared with those structures reconstructed from pre-surgical Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT).
KeywordsUltrasound Computer guided interventions Orthognathic surgery Cone beam computed tomography
Research reported in this publication was supported by the National Institute of Dental & Craniofacial Research of the National Institutes of Health under Award Number R43DE024334. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health.
- 1.Bailey, L.J., Duong, H.L., Proffit, W.R.: Surgical Class III treatment: long-term stability and patient perceptions of treatment outcome. Int. J. Adult Orthodon. Orthognath. Surg. 13, 35–44 (1998)Google Scholar
- 2.Rankin, M., Borah, G.L.: Perceived functional impact of abnormal facial appearance. Plast. Reconstr. Surg. 111, 2140–6; discussion 2147–8 (2003)Google Scholar
- 3.Phillips, C., Bennett, M.E., Broder, H.L.: Dentofacial disharmony: psychological status of patients seeking treatment consultation. Angle Orthod. 68, 547–556 (1998)Google Scholar
- 5.Xia, J.J., Gateno, J., Teichgraeber, J.F., Christensen, A.M., Lasky, R.E., Lemoine, J.J., Liebschner, M.A.K.: Accuracy of the computer-aided surgical simulation (CASS) system in the treatment of patients with complex craniomaxillofacial deformity: A pilot study. J. Oral Maxillofac. Surg. 65, 248–254 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 9.Proffit, W.R., Fields, H.W., Moray, L.J.: Prevalence of malocclusion and orthodontic treatment need in the United States: estimates from the NHANES III survey. Int. J. Adult Orthodon. Orthognath. Surg. 13, 97–106 (1998)Google Scholar
- 13.Gateno, J., Miloro, M., Hendler, B.H., Horrow, M.: The use of ultrasound to determine the position of the mandibular condyle. J. Oral Maxillofac. Surg. 51, 1081–6; discussion 1086–7 (1993)Google Scholar
- 14.Hayashi, T., Ito, J., Koyama, J., Yamada, K.: The accuracy of sonography for evaluation of internal derangement of the temporomandibular joint in asymptomatic elementary school children: comparison with MR and CT. AJNR Am. J. Neuroradiol. 22, 728–734 (2001)Google Scholar
- 15.Dolphin ImagingGoogle Scholar
- 16.3dMD: 3DMD. http://www.3dmd.com/
- 17.Maxilim Surgical Planning Software. http://www.dentalcompare.com/4885-Implant-Surgical-Guide-Systems/41444-Maxilim-Maxillofacial-Surgery-Planning-Software/