Добавил:
Sekretar
kiopkiopkiop18@yandex.ru
t.me/Prokururor I Вовсе не секретарь, но почту проверяю
Опубликованный материал нарушает ваши авторские права? Сообщите нам.
Вуз:
Предмет:
Файл:Ординатура / Хирургия / Библиотека им академика М.И. Перельмана / Книга_980_Библиотеки_им_академика_М_И_Перельмана
.pdf
Digitally Assisted Orthognathic Surgical Planning: Denition, History, andInnovation
https://t.me/medicina_free
23. Hsu SS-P, etal. Accuracy of a computer-aided surgical simulation protocol for orthognathic
surgery: a prospective multicenter study. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2013;71:128–42.
24. Zhang N, et al. Accuracy of virtual surgical planning in two-jaw orthognathic surgery:
comparison of planned and actual results. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol.
2016;122:143–51.
25. Wu W, et al. Haptic simulation framework for determining virtual dental occlusion. Int J
Comput Assist Radiol Surg. 2017;12:595–606.
26. Nadjmi N, et al. Virtual occlusion in planning orthognathic surgical procedures. Int J Oral
Maxillofac Surg. 2010;39:457–62.
27. Baan F, et al. Virtual occlusion in orthognathic surgery. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg.
2021;50:1219–25.
28. Kraeima J, Jansma J, Schepers RH.Splintless surgery: does patient-specic CAD-CAM osteosynthesis improve accuracy of Le fort I osteotomy? Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2016;54:1085–9.
29. Bai S, etal. CAD/CAM surface templates as an alternative to the intermediate wafer in orthognathic surgery. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2010;110:e1–7.
30. Williams A, Walker K, Hughes D, Goodson AMC, Mustafa SF.Accuracy and cost effectiveness of a waferless osteotomy approach, using patient specic guides and plates in orthognathic surgery: a systematic review. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2021;60(5):537–46.
31. Burt DE.Virtual reality in anaesthesia. Br J Anaesth. 1995;75:472–80.
32. Feiner SK.Augmented reality: a new way of seeing. Sci Am. 2002;286:48–55.
33. Joda T, Gallucci GO, Wismeijer D, Zitzmann NU.Augmented and virtual reality in dental
medicine: a systematic review. Comput Biol Med. 2019;108:93–100.
34. Mehrotra D, Markus AF. Emerging simulation technologies in global craniofacial surgical
training. J Oral Biol Craniofac Res. 2021;11:486.
35. Pulijala Y, Ma M, Ayoub A.VR surgery: interactive virtual reality application for training oral
and maxillofacial surgeons using oculus rift and leap motion. In: Serious games and edutainment applications. Cham: Springer; 2017. p.187–202.
36. Pulijala Y, Ma M, Pears M, Peebles D, Ayoub A.Effectiveness of immersive virtual reality in
surgical training—a randomized control trial. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2018;76:1065–72.
37. Ricciardi F, Copelli C, De Paolis LT.An augmented reality system for maxillo-facial surgery. In: International conference on augmented reality, virtual reality and computer graphics.
Cham: Springer; 2017. p.53–62.
38. Anand M, Panwar S.Role of navigation in oral and maxillofacial surgery: a surgeon’s perspectives. Clin Cosmet Investig Dent. 2021;13:127.
39. Mandelaris GA, Stefanelli LV, DeGroot BS.Dynamic navigation for surgical implant placement: overview of technology, key concepts, and a case report. Compend Contin Educ Dent.
2018;39:614–21.
40. Järvinen S, Suojanen J, Suomalainen A, Stoor P. Virtual surgical planning combined with
intraoperative navigation in mandibular bilateral sagittal split osteotomy for accurate placement of patient specic implants. J Craniofac Surg. 2021;32:2666–70.
41. Hwang Y-E, Kang S-H, Kim H-K.Errors according to the number of registered markers used
in navigation-assisted surgery of the mandible. Head Face Med. 2019;15:1–10.
42. Kim S-H, et al. Quantitative augmented reality-assisted free-hand orthognathic surgery
using electromagnetic tracking and skin-attached dynamic reference. J Craniofac Surg.
2020;31:2175–81.
43. Mazzoni S, et al. Simulation-guided navigation: a new approach to improve intraoperative three-dimensional reproducibility during orthognathic surgery. J Craniofac Surg.
2010;21:1698–705.
44. Badiali G, etal. Augmented reality as an aid in maxillofacial surgery: validation of a wearable
system allowing maxillary repositioning. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2014;42:1970–6.
45. Kwoh YS, Hou J, Jonckheere EA, Hayati S.A robot with improved absolute positioning accuracy for CT guided stereotactic brain surgery. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 1988;35:153–60.
197
198
https://t.me/medicina_free
46. Lin L, etal. Mandibular angle split osteotomy based on a novel augmented reality navigation using specialized robot-assisted arms—a feasibility study. J Craniomaxillofac Surg.
2016;44:215–23.
47. Pugin F, Bucher P, Morel P. History of robotic surgery: from AESOP® and ZEUS® to da
Vinci®. J Visc Surg. 2011;5:e3–8.
48. Han JJ, Woo S-Y, Yi W-J, Hwang SJ.A robot arm and image-guided navigation assisted surgical system for maxillary repositioning in orthognathic surgery: a phantom skull-based trial.
Appl Sci. 2020;10:1549.
49. Han JJ, Woo S-Y, Yi W-J, Hwang SJ.Robot-assisted maxillary positioning in orthognathic
surgery: a feasibility and accuracy evaluation. J Clin Med. 2021;10:2596.
50. Liu H-H, Li L-J, Shi B, Xu C-W, Luo E.Robotic surgical systems in maxillofacial surgery: a
review. Int J Oral Sci. 2017;9:63–73.
N. M. AlOtaibi and A. F. Ayoub
Application ofAdvanced Technologies
https://t.me/medicina_free
inFacial Cosmetic Surgery: History,
Definition, andIndication
SeiedOmidKeyhan, BehnazPoorian, andTirbodFattahi
1 Introduction
Surgical and nonsurgical features of facial plastic and reconstructive procedures add
a further layer of complexity in determining the best course of action. Incorporation
of modern technology into craniofacial plastic and reconstructive surgery needs a
fundamental and practical method of analyzing to identify and examining issues
related to cost-benet assessment, practicality, and outcomes compared with other
treatment modality [1].
Innovative technology gives us the opportunity to grow our practice and provide
more options for patient care. However, there are some questions about using innovative technologies. As conventional methods work, the rst question arises regarding the essence of the application of modern technologies. The second is how
promising the technology can be. Three concepts of modern medicine answer the
rst question: reduced invasiveness, faster recovery, and improved quality of life.
S. O. Keyhan (*)
College of Dentistry, Gangneung-Wonju National University, Gangneung, South Korea
Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, University of Florida, College of Medicine,
Jacksonville, FL, USA
Maxillofacial Surgery and Implantology and Biomaterial Research Foundation, Tehran, Iran
B. Poorian
Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Department, Azad University of Medical Sciences, Tehran
Branch, Tehran, Iran
Maxillofacial Surgery and Implantology and Biomaterial Research Foundation,
Isfahan/Tehran, Iran
T. Fattahi
Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, University of Florida, Jacksonville, FL, USA
© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2023
A. Khojasteh et al. (eds.), Emerging Technologies in Oral and Maxillofacial
Surgery, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-8602-4_11
199
200
ac
bd
https://t.me/medicina_free
S. O. Keyhan et al.
2 Computer Technology
The craniomaxillofacial region has a complex anatomy. The prediction and accuracy of diagnosis and surgical treatments can be improved by developing computerassisted systems, including 3D models, virtual treatment planning and navigation,
custom surgical templates or implants, and endoscopic or robotic surgery [2, 3].
3 Three-Dimensional (3D) Methods
3D printing is a multilayer process that fuses or deposits various materials such as
plastics, metals, ceramics, powders, liquids, and even living cells into 3D structures
to generate physical models from digital layouts. It can manufacture surgical templates, pre-curved plates, facial prosthesis, osteotomy line guides, and occlusal
splints. Some of the advantages of 3D printers are the creation of highly accurate
models, reduced operation time, and ease of treatment planning and training [4]
(Figs.1, 2, and 3).
Various techniques introduced in 3D printing include fused deposition modeling
(FDM), indirect processes, laser melting (LM), binder jetting (BJ), electron beam
Fig. 1 (a) An osteotomy (Computer assisted Zigzag Genioplasty described by keyhan et al.) line
is drawn on a three-dimensional model and a custom surgical template is tted to the bony anatomy. (b) Perform an osteotomy on the model and x the movable segment with adhesive wax after
removing the additional parts. (c) Osteotomy lines designed with 3D technology are drawn on the
bone. (d) Perform chin reduction based on pre-drawn osteotomy lines. Simulating surgery and
preoperative plate bending allows novice surgeons to do more accurate genioplasty [5]
cd
b
Application of Advanced Technologies in Facial Cosmetic Surgery: History, Denition…
https://t.me/medicina_free
201
a
Fig. 2 Chin osteotomy (Horizontal Translational osseous genioplasty,described by keyhan.et.al)
with a surgical guide can provide the accurate osteotomy line and positioning of segments
Fig. 3 The planned osteotomy line was drawn on the 3D model. As regards the thickness of nasal
soft-tissue lining, 2-mm-thick wax was molded on the model nose. The softened external splint
was trimmed with scissors along the osteotomy line. A custom splint over the patient’s nose and
lateral nasal wall osteotomy will be done along the splint boundary. The authors cited shorter surgical times and more predictable outcomes as advantages [6]
202
ab
cd
https://t.me/medicina_free
S. O. Keyhan et al.
melting (EBM), material jetting (MJ), photopolymer jetting (PJ), laser sintering
(LS), and stereolithography (SL). Among these techniques, the demand for SL,
FDM, and PJ is highlighted in craniomaxillofacial procedures.
3.1 Stereolithography (SL)
The earliest SL applies a laser to polymerize resin in two-dimensional designs. As a
pioneering additive manufacturing technology, SL technology creates the 3D model
using a low-power UV laser to cure liquid photopolymer or epoxy resin layers. SL
uses a UV laser across a section of a monolayer of resin on photopolymer to bond
the layers together. This layer-by-layer projection continues until all zones of the
product are created. SL technology uses a mirror to conduct the laser onto the surface, layer by layer, from the base to the surface. Waste is extracted manually at the
end of the process.
With a yield resolution down to 0.025mm, SL is the gold standard for 3D manufacturing. SL is more reliable at reconstructing internal scaffolding, allowing larger
objects to be created more efciently. SL generally has better surface and accuracy
than any 3D technology. Acrylic and epoxy resins are routinely utilized in this process. However, SL needs to be processed manually after production and may take a
day or more. SL is more expensive than other technologies due to high raw material
and equipment maintenance costs. SL is mainly used for manufacturing implant
drilling templates. The main advantages of the SL technique are fabrication of the
elaborate and complex structures, the easy extraction of waste resins, and the
extremely high resolution (~1.2 μm) (Figs.4 and 5).
Fig. 4 (a, c) Digital designing of a chin osteotomy template. (b, d) A precise drilling template was
manufactured using rapid prototyping techniques to match the chin anatomy exactly (SLA
technology- RUNA CO., Tehran, Iran) [4]
ab
Application of Advanced Technologies in Facial Cosmetic Surgery: History, Denition…
https://t.me/medicina_free
Fig. 5 Using cutting surgical guide and xation guide in the correct position in a patient with a
mild chin deviation which horizontal translational osseous genioplasty was done [4]
203
4 Fused Deposition Modeling
A similar concept of layer-by-layer model production in SL printing is used in FD
modeling. FDM is considered the most cost-effective among the other 3D printing
methods. In FDM, a molten lament of thermoplastic material is forced out through
a nozzle, moves in the x-y plane, and solidies as it deposits on a build plate and
continues up to create the nal object. Frequently, the acrylonitrile butadiene styrene (ABS) and polylactic acid (PLA) are used as the raw materials in FDM printers, which are known to be key components of bioprinting scaffold structures. A
signicant drawback or disadvantage of FDM is its inability to form complex structures. Hollow internal or blind-end opening organs are especially problematic for
manufacturing sanitary products. Nearly all FDM printers are limited to single color
and single material production, but recently dual extruder high-tech equipment can
overcome this shortage. Like SL, FDM models also require support structures
because the thermoplastic curing and layer bonding take time. High porosity and
excellent mechanical strength due to the deposition pattern are signicant advantages of FDM.
5 PolyJet Technique
PolyJet technology or multijet modeling printing is similar to SL; but the liquid
photopolymer is instantly cured by UV light. Multijet modeling printing can produce high-resolution prototypes equal to or better than SL.The keeping up of MJM
(multijet modeling) printers is more manageable than SL technique. On the contrary, MJM is an expensive printer and is more suited for mass production than
ofce use. Additionally, the material used in this method is stubborn and can be very
204
https://t.me/medicina_free
S. O. Keyhan et al.
difcult to remove. The strong point of this method is the use of various printheads
providing synchronic printing of different kinds of material or graded material mixtures to alter the qualities of the printed item [7].
6 Facial Prosthetics
Computer-aided design and manufacturing (CAD/CAM) and 3D printing are the
technologies which are revolutionizing the maxillofacial prostheses fabrication with
the maximal accuracy and quality. Typically, patient-specic models, high permanence, lower price and treatment time, excluding impression procedures, and perfect compatibility are the benecial aspects of utilization of additive manufacturing
technology in maxillofacial prostheses fabrication [8] (Figs.6 and 7).
Although additive manufacturing is primarily utilized for hard tissue defect, it is
also applicable for soft-tissue deformity, such as auricular and nose defect reconstruction. Manufacturing an ear prosthesis consists of several time-wasting steps
Fig. 6 Computer-assisted patient-specic malar and mandibular angle implant designing. The
surgical procedure for inserting and xating the mandibular angle and zygomatic prosthesis.
Maximum adaptation, reduced operation time, and high durability are the key advantages of the
patient-specic implant
Application of Advanced Technologies in Facial Cosmetic Surgery: History, Denition…
https://t.me/medicina_free
Fig. 6 (continued)
205
that require patient presence. 3D printing technology shortens this process; instead
of a week, it completes in 24–48h [8] (Figs.8 and 9).
Surgical Navigation: The introduction of surgical navigation in craniomaxillofacial surgery was rst described in the 1990s. It presents information about the
position and movement of surgical instruments within the surgical environment in
real time on monitors in the operating room. The actual path of inserting the surgical
devices in three-dimensional perspectives could be projected on the monitor. In this
way, correct surgical device placement, identify critical anatomy, measure the extent
of dissection, prevent damage to vital structures and ensure the bone grafts position,
plates and xation screws will be enhanced by intraoperative navigation. This also
reduces human error and improves adherence to preoperative plans [10, 11]. Surgical
navigation is based on CT, MRI, or other data acquired preoperatively. They could
be affected by factors consisting of image conversion, software and hardware items,
data collection, resolution and radiation dose, scan slice thickness, titanium plate’s
shadowiness, and precision of the three-dimensional reconstruction (Fig.10).
Historically, the rst surgical simulation in plastic surgery dates back to 600
BC.Sushruta, a preeminent Indian physician, used a leaf and clay model to simulate
the steps of a forehead nasal ap reconstruction. The “cyberspace” environment
allows a surgeon to formulate surgical plan, simulate procedure, and predict softtissue change before the operation.
The virtual reality 3D simulation primary tasks are as follows:
1. CT data processing
2. Soft-tissue 3D model generation
206
https://t.me/medicina_free
S. O. Keyhan et al.
Fig. 7 Fabrication of a mandibular angle prosthesis in a 24-year-old patient with hemifacial macrosomia by CAD/CAM and 3D designing technology [8]
3. Simulation of the surgery
4. Soft-tissue change prediction [13–15] (Fig.11)
Augmented Reality (AR): This technology can arrange the operation with a 3D
computer-fabricated model superimposed onto real objects, all in real time. AR
techniques provide direct guidance by automatically displaying fundamental data
such as hard to access anatomical structure. Therefore, it is anticipated to improve
precision and decrease operation time with lower risks [2, 13] (Fig.12).
Operation using AR navigation may result in a slight delay in regard to the traditional navigation system as a result of the following causes (a) the scene is captured
by 4K camera and then sent to the computer, and (b) the computer calculates this
information and incorporates the 3D models on the screen. This issue can be settled
by using a high-quality GPU [2].
Соседние файлы в папке Библиотека им академика М.И. Перельмана