Accuracy of computer-assisted surgery in mandibular reconstruction: A systematic review

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articleAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

Computer-assisted surgery (CAS) for mandibular reconstruction was developed to improve conventional treatment methods. In the past years, many different software programs have entered the market, offering numerous approaches for preoperative planning and postoperative evaluation of the CAS process of mandibular reconstruction. In this systematic review, we reviewed planning and evaluation methods in studies that quantitatively assessed accuracy of mandibular reconstruction performed with CAS. We included 42 studies describing 413 mandibular reconstructions planned and evaluated using CAS. The commonest software was Proplan/Surgicase CMF (55%). In most cases, the postoperative virtual 3-dimensional model was compared to the preoperative 3-dimensional model, revised to the virtual plan (64%). The commonest landmark for accuracy measurements was the condyle (54%). Accuracy deviations ranged between 0 mm and 12.5 mm and between 0.9° and 17.5°. Because of a lack of uniformity in planning (e.g., image acquisition, mandibular resection size) and evaluation methodologies, the ability to compare postoperative outcomes was limited; meta-analysis was not performed. A practical and simple guideline for standardizing planning and evaluation methods needs to be considered to allow valid comparisons of postoperative results and facilitate meta-analysis in the future.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)52-60
Number of pages9
JournalOral Oncology
Volume84
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Sep 2018

Cite this

@article{ac6c06e50fd949e2a93445be5bfc78dd,
title = "Accuracy of computer-assisted surgery in mandibular reconstruction: A systematic review",
abstract = "Computer-assisted surgery (CAS) for mandibular reconstruction was developed to improve conventional treatment methods. In the past years, many different software programs have entered the market, offering numerous approaches for preoperative planning and postoperative evaluation of the CAS process of mandibular reconstruction. In this systematic review, we reviewed planning and evaluation methods in studies that quantitatively assessed accuracy of mandibular reconstruction performed with CAS. We included 42 studies describing 413 mandibular reconstructions planned and evaluated using CAS. The commonest software was Proplan/Surgicase CMF (55{\%}). In most cases, the postoperative virtual 3-dimensional model was compared to the preoperative 3-dimensional model, revised to the virtual plan (64{\%}). The commonest landmark for accuracy measurements was the condyle (54{\%}). Accuracy deviations ranged between 0 mm and 12.5 mm and between 0.9° and 17.5°. Because of a lack of uniformity in planning (e.g., image acquisition, mandibular resection size) and evaluation methodologies, the ability to compare postoperative outcomes was limited; meta-analysis was not performed. A practical and simple guideline for standardizing planning and evaluation methods needs to be considered to allow valid comparisons of postoperative results and facilitate meta-analysis in the future.",
keywords = "Computer-aided design, Computer-aided manufacturing, Computer-assisted, Data accuracy, Free tissue flaps, Mandibular reconstruction, Oral cancer, Printing, Software, Surgery, Three-dimensional",
author = "{van Baar}, {Gustaaf J.C.} and Tymour Forouzanfar and Liberton, {Niels P.T.J.} and Winters, {Henri A.H.} and Leusink, {Frank K.J.}",
year = "2018",
month = "9",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.oraloncology.2018.07.004",
language = "English",
volume = "84",
pages = "52--60",
journal = "Oral Oncology",
issn = "1368-8375",
publisher = "Elsevier Limited",

}

Accuracy of computer-assisted surgery in mandibular reconstruction : A systematic review. / van Baar, Gustaaf J.C.; Forouzanfar, Tymour; Liberton, Niels P.T.J.; Winters, Henri A.H.; Leusink, Frank K.J.

In: Oral Oncology, Vol. 84, 01.09.2018, p. 52-60.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articleAcademicpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Accuracy of computer-assisted surgery in mandibular reconstruction

T2 - A systematic review

AU - van Baar, Gustaaf J.C.

AU - Forouzanfar, Tymour

AU - Liberton, Niels P.T.J.

AU - Winters, Henri A.H.

AU - Leusink, Frank K.J.

PY - 2018/9/1

Y1 - 2018/9/1

N2 - Computer-assisted surgery (CAS) for mandibular reconstruction was developed to improve conventional treatment methods. In the past years, many different software programs have entered the market, offering numerous approaches for preoperative planning and postoperative evaluation of the CAS process of mandibular reconstruction. In this systematic review, we reviewed planning and evaluation methods in studies that quantitatively assessed accuracy of mandibular reconstruction performed with CAS. We included 42 studies describing 413 mandibular reconstructions planned and evaluated using CAS. The commonest software was Proplan/Surgicase CMF (55%). In most cases, the postoperative virtual 3-dimensional model was compared to the preoperative 3-dimensional model, revised to the virtual plan (64%). The commonest landmark for accuracy measurements was the condyle (54%). Accuracy deviations ranged between 0 mm and 12.5 mm and between 0.9° and 17.5°. Because of a lack of uniformity in planning (e.g., image acquisition, mandibular resection size) and evaluation methodologies, the ability to compare postoperative outcomes was limited; meta-analysis was not performed. A practical and simple guideline for standardizing planning and evaluation methods needs to be considered to allow valid comparisons of postoperative results and facilitate meta-analysis in the future.

AB - Computer-assisted surgery (CAS) for mandibular reconstruction was developed to improve conventional treatment methods. In the past years, many different software programs have entered the market, offering numerous approaches for preoperative planning and postoperative evaluation of the CAS process of mandibular reconstruction. In this systematic review, we reviewed planning and evaluation methods in studies that quantitatively assessed accuracy of mandibular reconstruction performed with CAS. We included 42 studies describing 413 mandibular reconstructions planned and evaluated using CAS. The commonest software was Proplan/Surgicase CMF (55%). In most cases, the postoperative virtual 3-dimensional model was compared to the preoperative 3-dimensional model, revised to the virtual plan (64%). The commonest landmark for accuracy measurements was the condyle (54%). Accuracy deviations ranged between 0 mm and 12.5 mm and between 0.9° and 17.5°. Because of a lack of uniformity in planning (e.g., image acquisition, mandibular resection size) and evaluation methodologies, the ability to compare postoperative outcomes was limited; meta-analysis was not performed. A practical and simple guideline for standardizing planning and evaluation methods needs to be considered to allow valid comparisons of postoperative results and facilitate meta-analysis in the future.

KW - Computer-aided design

KW - Computer-aided manufacturing

KW - Computer-assisted

KW - Data accuracy

KW - Free tissue flaps

KW - Mandibular reconstruction

KW - Oral cancer

KW - Printing

KW - Software

KW - Surgery

KW - Three-dimensional

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85050140378&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.oraloncology.2018.07.004

DO - 10.1016/j.oraloncology.2018.07.004

M3 - Review article

VL - 84

SP - 52

EP - 60

JO - Oral Oncology

JF - Oral Oncology

SN - 1368-8375

ER -