Comparison of different registration methods for surgical navigation in cranio-maxillofacial surgery
Summary 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 th...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of cranio-maxillo-facial surgery 2008-03, Vol.36 (2), p.109-116 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 116 |
---|---|
container_issue | 2 |
container_start_page | 109 |
container_title | Journal of cranio-maxillo-facial surgery |
container_volume | 36 |
creator | Luebbers, Heinz-Theo, MD, DMD Messmer, Peter, PD MD Obwegeser, Joachim Anton, PD MD, DMD Zwahlen, Roger Arthur, MD, DMD Kikinis, Ron, MD Graetz, Klaus Wilhelm, MD, DMD Matthews, Felix, MD |
description | Summary 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 1 mm was found for the periorbital region irrespective of registration method (range 0.6–1.1 mm). 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 0.8 mm ( p < 0.001) on the viscerocranium and 2.3–1.2 mm ( 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. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.jcms.2007.09.002 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_70351610</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S1010518207001552</els_id><sourcerecordid>70351610</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c549t-7e2e17e28193ed2ab43ddac978fe457e07812bf7b0daa06e0f58b3985fa662b43</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kk2r1DAUhoMo3uvVP-BCutFd60k6aVIQ4TL4BRdcqOuQJidjapuMSXtx_r0pMyi4cJOEnOc9hCeHkOcUGgq0ez02o5lzwwBEA30DwB6QayqFrHeU9g_LGSjUnEp2RZ7kPAJAB7J_TK7KlQQq2mti93E-6uRzDFV0lfXOYcKwVAkPPi9JL75UZly-R5srF1OV13TwRk9V0Pf-cK77UJmkg4_1rH_5aYpOG1-QjcV0ekoeOT1lfHbZb8i39---7j_Wd58_fNrf3tWG7_qlFsiQlkXSvkXL9LBrrdWmF9LhjgsEISkbnBjAag0dguNyaHvJne46Vugb8urc95jizxXzomafDU6TDhjXrAS0nHYUCsjOoEkx54ROHZOfdTopCmpzq0a1uVWbWwW9Km5L6MWl-zrMaP9GLjIL8PIC6FwEuWLE-PyHYwWSouWFe3PmsLi495hUNh6DQesTmkXZ6P__jrf_xM3kw_YlP_CEeYxrCsWyoiozBerLNgXbEIAAoJyz9jchra7A</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>70351610</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Comparison of different registration methods for surgical navigation in cranio-maxillofacial surgery</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>ScienceDirect Journals (5 years ago - present)</source><creator>Luebbers, Heinz-Theo, MD, DMD ; Messmer, Peter, PD MD ; Obwegeser, Joachim Anton, PD MD, DMD ; Zwahlen, Roger Arthur, MD, DMD ; Kikinis, Ron, MD ; Graetz, Klaus Wilhelm, MD, DMD ; Matthews, Felix, MD</creator><creatorcontrib>Luebbers, Heinz-Theo, MD, DMD ; Messmer, Peter, PD MD ; Obwegeser, Joachim Anton, PD MD, DMD ; Zwahlen, Roger Arthur, MD, DMD ; Kikinis, Ron, MD ; Graetz, Klaus Wilhelm, MD, DMD ; Matthews, Felix, MD</creatorcontrib><description>Summary 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 1 mm was found for the periorbital region irrespective of registration method (range 0.6–1.1 mm). 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 0.8 mm ( p < 0.001) on the viscerocranium and 2.3–1.2 mm ( 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.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1010-5182</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1878-4119</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.jcms.2007.09.002</identifier><identifier>PMID: 18280173</identifier><identifier>CODEN: JCMSET</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Kidlington: Elsevier Ltd</publisher><subject>Biological and medical sciences ; Bone Screws ; comparative study ; Contrast Media ; Dentistry ; Facial Bones - surgery ; Humans ; Imaging, Three-Dimensional - methods ; Lasers ; Medical sciences ; Models, Anatomic ; Occlusal Splints ; Orbit ; Otorhinolaryngology. Stomatology ; Patient Care Planning ; Phantoms, Imaging ; Surgery ; Surgery, Computer-Assisted ; surgery, maxillofacial ; tomography, X-ray ; Tomography, X-Ray Computed</subject><ispartof>Journal of cranio-maxillo-facial surgery, 2008-03, Vol.36 (2), p.109-116</ispartof><rights>European Association for Cranio-Maxillofacial Surgery</rights><rights>2007 European Association for Cranio-Maxillofacial Surgery</rights><rights>2008 INIST-CNRS</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c549t-7e2e17e28193ed2ab43ddac978fe457e07812bf7b0daa06e0f58b3985fa662b43</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c549t-7e2e17e28193ed2ab43ddac978fe457e07812bf7b0daa06e0f58b3985fa662b43</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcms.2007.09.002$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,3550,27924,27925,45995</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=20178735$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18280173$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Luebbers, Heinz-Theo, MD, DMD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Messmer, Peter, PD MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Obwegeser, Joachim Anton, PD MD, DMD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zwahlen, Roger Arthur, MD, DMD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kikinis, Ron, MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Graetz, Klaus Wilhelm, MD, DMD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Matthews, Felix, MD</creatorcontrib><title>Comparison of different registration methods for surgical navigation in cranio-maxillofacial surgery</title><title>Journal of cranio-maxillo-facial surgery</title><addtitle>J Craniomaxillofac Surg</addtitle><description>Summary 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 1 mm was found for the periorbital region irrespective of registration method (range 0.6–1.1 mm). 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 0.8 mm ( p < 0.001) on the viscerocranium and 2.3–1.2 mm ( 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.</description><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Bone Screws</subject><subject>comparative study</subject><subject>Contrast Media</subject><subject>Dentistry</subject><subject>Facial Bones - surgery</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Imaging, Three-Dimensional - methods</subject><subject>Lasers</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Models, Anatomic</subject><subject>Occlusal Splints</subject><subject>Orbit</subject><subject>Otorhinolaryngology. Stomatology</subject><subject>Patient Care Planning</subject><subject>Phantoms, Imaging</subject><subject>Surgery</subject><subject>Surgery, Computer-Assisted</subject><subject>surgery, maxillofacial</subject><subject>tomography, X-ray</subject><subject>Tomography, X-Ray Computed</subject><issn>1010-5182</issn><issn>1878-4119</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2008</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kk2r1DAUhoMo3uvVP-BCutFd60k6aVIQ4TL4BRdcqOuQJidjapuMSXtx_r0pMyi4cJOEnOc9hCeHkOcUGgq0ez02o5lzwwBEA30DwB6QayqFrHeU9g_LGSjUnEp2RZ7kPAJAB7J_TK7KlQQq2mti93E-6uRzDFV0lfXOYcKwVAkPPi9JL75UZly-R5srF1OV13TwRk9V0Pf-cK77UJmkg4_1rH_5aYpOG1-QjcV0ekoeOT1lfHbZb8i39---7j_Wd58_fNrf3tWG7_qlFsiQlkXSvkXL9LBrrdWmF9LhjgsEISkbnBjAag0dguNyaHvJne46Vugb8urc95jizxXzomafDU6TDhjXrAS0nHYUCsjOoEkx54ROHZOfdTopCmpzq0a1uVWbWwW9Km5L6MWl-zrMaP9GLjIL8PIC6FwEuWLE-PyHYwWSouWFe3PmsLi495hUNh6DQesTmkXZ6P__jrf_xM3kw_YlP_CEeYxrCsWyoiozBerLNgXbEIAAoJyz9jchra7A</recordid><startdate>20080301</startdate><enddate>20080301</enddate><creator>Luebbers, Heinz-Theo, MD, DMD</creator><creator>Messmer, Peter, PD MD</creator><creator>Obwegeser, Joachim Anton, PD MD, DMD</creator><creator>Zwahlen, Roger Arthur, MD, DMD</creator><creator>Kikinis, Ron, MD</creator><creator>Graetz, Klaus Wilhelm, MD, DMD</creator><creator>Matthews, Felix, MD</creator><general>Elsevier Ltd</general><general>Elsevier</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20080301</creationdate><title>Comparison of different registration methods for surgical navigation in cranio-maxillofacial surgery</title><author>Luebbers, Heinz-Theo, MD, DMD ; Messmer, Peter, PD MD ; Obwegeser, Joachim Anton, PD MD, DMD ; Zwahlen, Roger Arthur, MD, DMD ; Kikinis, Ron, MD ; Graetz, Klaus Wilhelm, MD, DMD ; Matthews, Felix, MD</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c549t-7e2e17e28193ed2ab43ddac978fe457e07812bf7b0daa06e0f58b3985fa662b43</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2008</creationdate><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Bone Screws</topic><topic>comparative study</topic><topic>Contrast Media</topic><topic>Dentistry</topic><topic>Facial Bones - surgery</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Imaging, Three-Dimensional - methods</topic><topic>Lasers</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Models, Anatomic</topic><topic>Occlusal Splints</topic><topic>Orbit</topic><topic>Otorhinolaryngology. Stomatology</topic><topic>Patient Care Planning</topic><topic>Phantoms, Imaging</topic><topic>Surgery</topic><topic>Surgery, Computer-Assisted</topic><topic>surgery, maxillofacial</topic><topic>tomography, X-ray</topic><topic>Tomography, X-Ray Computed</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Luebbers, Heinz-Theo, MD, DMD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Messmer, Peter, PD MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Obwegeser, Joachim Anton, PD MD, DMD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zwahlen, Roger Arthur, MD, DMD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kikinis, Ron, MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Graetz, Klaus Wilhelm, MD, DMD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Matthews, Felix, MD</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of cranio-maxillo-facial surgery</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Luebbers, Heinz-Theo, MD, DMD</au><au>Messmer, Peter, PD MD</au><au>Obwegeser, Joachim Anton, PD MD, DMD</au><au>Zwahlen, Roger Arthur, MD, DMD</au><au>Kikinis, Ron, MD</au><au>Graetz, Klaus Wilhelm, MD, DMD</au><au>Matthews, Felix, MD</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Comparison of different registration methods for surgical navigation in cranio-maxillofacial surgery</atitle><jtitle>Journal of cranio-maxillo-facial surgery</jtitle><addtitle>J Craniomaxillofac Surg</addtitle><date>2008-03-01</date><risdate>2008</risdate><volume>36</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>109</spage><epage>116</epage><pages>109-116</pages><issn>1010-5182</issn><eissn>1878-4119</eissn><coden>JCMSET</coden><abstract>Summary 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 1 mm was found for the periorbital region irrespective of registration method (range 0.6–1.1 mm). 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 0.8 mm ( p < 0.001) on the viscerocranium and 2.3–1.2 mm ( 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.</abstract><cop>Kidlington</cop><pub>Elsevier Ltd</pub><pmid>18280173</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.jcms.2007.09.002</doi><tpages>8</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1010-5182 |
ispartof | Journal of cranio-maxillo-facial surgery, 2008-03, Vol.36 (2), p.109-116 |
issn | 1010-5182 1878-4119 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_70351610 |
source | MEDLINE; ScienceDirect Journals (5 years ago - present) |
subjects | Biological and medical sciences Bone Screws comparative study Contrast Media Dentistry Facial Bones - surgery Humans Imaging, Three-Dimensional - methods Lasers Medical sciences Models, Anatomic Occlusal Splints Orbit Otorhinolaryngology. Stomatology Patient Care Planning Phantoms, Imaging Surgery Surgery, Computer-Assisted surgery, maxillofacial tomography, X-ray Tomography, X-Ray Computed |
title | Comparison of different registration methods for surgical navigation in cranio-maxillofacial surgery |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-06T09%3A37%3A18IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparison%20of%20different%20registration%20methods%20for%20surgical%20navigation%20in%20cranio-maxillofacial%20surgery&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20cranio-maxillo-facial%20surgery&rft.au=Luebbers,%20Heinz-Theo,%20MD,%20DMD&rft.date=2008-03-01&rft.volume=36&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=109&rft.epage=116&rft.pages=109-116&rft.issn=1010-5182&rft.eissn=1878-4119&rft.coden=JCMSET&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.jcms.2007.09.002&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E70351610%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=70351610&rft_id=info:pmid/18280173&rft_els_id=S1010518207001552&rfr_iscdi=true |