Article
Cover
RJDS Journal Cover Page

RGUHS Nat. J. Pub. Heal. Sci Vol No: 16 Issue No: 3   pISSN: 

Article Submission Guidelines

Dear Authors,
We invite you to watch this comprehensive video guide on the process of submitting your article online. This video will provide you with step-by-step instructions to ensure a smooth and successful submission.
Thank you for your attention and cooperation.

Review Article
Dr. Seema S Pendharkar*,1,

1Associate Professor, Department Of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, CSMSS Dental College, Aurangabad, Maharashtra, India.

*Corresponding Author:

Associate Professor, Department Of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, CSMSS Dental College, Aurangabad, Maharashtra, India., Email: dr.seemapendharkar@gmail.com
Received Date: 2022-05-09,
Accepted Date: 2022-07-07,
Published Date: 2022-12-31
Year: 2022, Volume: 14, Issue: 4, Page no. 19-23, DOI: 10.26463/rjds.14_4_19
Views: 856, Downloads: 26
Licensing Information:
CC BY NC 4.0 ICON
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0.
Abstract

Oral and maxillofacial region has a complex anatomy with numerous blood vessels and critical organs in its association. To ensure the safety and reliability of the operative procedures in this region, numerous techniques of surgery are there from conventional to advanced. Surgeries with minimal invasive procedures such as computer-assisted navigation systems have been proposed.

This review overviews the navigation system, its working principle, and its applications in oral and maxillo-facial surgeries. Computer-assisted navigation can be now recognized as a minimal invasive procedure and proves to be a boon in surgeries in the oral and maxillofacial regions. The navigation system guides the surgeon and has accuracy and precision, preserving the complex anatomy of the oral region. It has proved to be effective in various surgeries such as orthognathic, complex dental alveolar surgeries, traumatic cases, etc.

<p>Oral and maxillofacial region has a complex anatomy with numerous blood vessels and critical organs in its association. To ensure the safety and reliability of the operative procedures in this region, numerous techniques of surgery are there from conventional to advanced. Surgeries with minimal invasive procedures such as computer-assisted navigation systems have been proposed.</p> <p>This review overviews the navigation system, its working principle, and its applications in oral and maxillo-facial surgeries. Computer-assisted navigation can be now recognized as a minimal invasive procedure and proves to be a boon in surgeries in the oral and maxillofacial regions. The navigation system guides the surgeon and has accuracy and precision, preserving the complex anatomy of the oral region. It has proved to be effective in various surgeries such as orthognathic, complex dental alveolar surgeries, traumatic cases, etc.</p>
Keywords
Computer-assisted surgery, Navigation system, Oral and maxillofacial region, Preoperative.
Downloads
  • 1
    FullTextPDF
Article
Introduction

Any surgical treatment plan starts with a perfect diagnosis and adequate information about the lesion, its proximity to adjacent structures and its surrounding anatomical landmarks. In the management of defects and disorders, developmental or acquired in oral and maxillofacial surgery, the main aim is to restore and re-establish facial form, symmetry, and function.1,2 To achieve the mentioned facial symmetry, form, and function, the correct imaging technique is very important. The oral and maxillofacial region has numerous vascular structures and complicated anatomy which need to be identified and preserved. The basic imaging technique used before oral and maxillofacial surgical procedures usually includes orthopantomography (OPG), Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT), Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI), and Computed Tomography scan (CT scan).

With the advancement in imaging technology, it has become easier for surgeons to visualize all the details and obtain large data on the lesion and structures by advanced digital imaging procedures. One such innovation in this field is computer-assisted navigation surgery. It was first put into use in neurosurgical procedures by Wantanabe in the year 1987 and was later introduced in oral surgical procedures.3,4 It is a minimal invasive technique that permits a direct approach to the target region via a small incision. It utilizes the images in preparing data and split it into – the first part- pre-surgical planning assisted by computer. It comprises pre-operative surgical stimulations with mock-up replicas and threedimensional images to identify the dental implant’s exact size and position, evaluate the treatment plans, and obtain an error-free representation of nearby and underlying vital organs as well as the skeletal anatomy of the patients.5 The other part includes navigation, which evolved in the order of —“diagnosis-surgical planning-surgery”. This permit the surgeon to envision the three-dimensional MRI or CT details of the patient in real time and the exact place of surgical instruments on the screen of the monitor. Navigation system requires the amalgamation of imaging and surgical field. This ensures concurrent visualization of various images so that the intraoperative structures can be disclosed. It allows navigation in areas of anatomical sensitivity.

Computer-assisted navigation systems have been developed to upgrade the surgical procedure and reduce intraoperative invasiveness, thus it becomes a minimal invasive surgical technique with improved accuracy.6

This article aims to shortly review the information available on computer-assisted navigation systems, their clinical applications, and the scope of navigation surgery systems in oral surgery.

The computer navigation system resembles the automobile’s Global Positioning System (GPS). It consists of three components —a localizer which is alike a space satellite, a surgical probe which acts as the waves released by the GPS, and a CT scan data set which corresponds to a road chart.7 It can also be used as Positron emission tomography (PET scan) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). There are major two kinds of accessible surgical navigation systems nowadays which include optical tracking systems and electromagnetic tracking systems.

The variance between the electromagnetic tracking systems and optical tracking systems

Optical tracking systems and electromagnetic tracking systems differ mainly in the method of providing information to the surgeon.

The optical navigation system utilizes infrared sensors with light reflectors attached to the patient’s head and a hand-held probe. The system camera on the computer displays the light-emitting structure and instrument. In this way, it becomes possible to trace the instrument and its position in the surgical field.8

The electromagnetic navigation system utilizes the electromagnetic field and the reference points fixed on the patient’s head along with the wired instrument used by the surgeon in the surgical area. However, its display on the camera system of the computer is not required.9

Method of registration

Registration can be done by marker-free technique10,11 and marker-based technique.12,13

Marker-free technique14-16- It depends on the canio-facial anatomy of the patient. It can be done by registering the protuberances of bone and correlating it with the structures detected on the CT scan.

Marker-based technique17-19- Markers are essential for this method. The markers become evident on the preoperative images and can be detected easily in the patient during the procedure. The markers can be skin adhesive reference markers, dental splints, or boneimplanted screws.

Clinical implementation of navigation surgery

With about ten years of experience, navigation surgery has found various clinical application in oral surgery and have proved to be beneficial. These include:-

Navigation surgery in maxillofacial trauma: Fractures involving orbital and zygomatic regions are encountered more commonly and the treatment becomes difficult and depends mainly on the displacement of the fractured bone and its stability.20,21 Treatment of orbito-zygomatic fracture is a challenging procedure as this region forms the width of the midfacial and its proper restoration is important for normal form, esthetic, and function.22 The advantage of computer-assisted navigation surgery is the accurate pre-operative preparation leading to precise orbital reconstruction.23 Navigation surgery in the orbital fracture can be performed using three-dimensional repositioning of the bones with the advantage that the surgeon has three-dimensional pictures of where the virtual bone replica should be rebuilt to obtain uniformity with the uninvolved side. In a study done by Leonard Bergeron et al., 50 patients with major facial fractures were assessed, out of which 28 were treated by the navigation system and 22 were treated without the navigation system. The result showed that the use of the navigation system reduced the surgical time by 36.1%.24

Computer-assisted navigation surgery proves to be a useful method for the correction of complex midfacial orbito-zygomatic fractures in emergency maxillofacial surgery cases.25

Navigation surgery in the removal of foreign bodies:

Removal of foreign bodies from the cranial/ oral-maxillofacial region becomes challenging due to the risk of damaging adjacent vital structures and improper visualization.26 The impacted foreign object may alter the normal anatomy of this region making it even more difficult to operate. Thus, adequate information about the exact location of the foreign object and precise planning of the treatment is necessary to avoid major complications.27 Preoperative CT scanning and three-dimensional image reconstruction make it easier to locate the object and its relation with surrounding structures and blood vessels. Shintaro Sukegawa et al. planned to remove a foreign body impacted in the maxilla using navigation-guided surgery to attempt a minimal invasive procedure. The technique proved to be useful with decreased operative time.28 Location of the foreign body in a three-dimensional space becomes easy and accurate by the navigation system and proves to be effective for foreign body removal.29

Navigation surgery in dentoalveolar surgeries: Removal of deeply impacted teeth, supernumerary teeth, etc. becomes difficult at times. Determining the correct position of the impacted teeth is very important for minimizing the time required for surgery. This leads to less damage to the bone while removing and decreasing post-operative complications.30 Therefore, it is necessary to obtain a three-dimensional image to learn about the position and relation of the tooth with surrounding structures before surgery. The navigation system can be useful for this reason. In a study by Wang et al., 31 it was reported that the computer-assisted navigation system gives advantages in the removal of deeply seated impacted teeth which includes:

• Locating the deeply impacted teeth accurately that helps in guiding them to the correct access point, minimizes bone loss and trauma.

• To differentiate between permanent tooth germ and deeply impacted tooth.

• To identify and mark safe margins thus preserving the surrounding vital structures.

Navigation surgery in Orthognathic Surgery: Orthodontic surgery by navigation system ensures to avoid critical structures in approximation. As compared to the conventional methods, navigation surgery proves to be beneficial by the advancement or setback of the maxilla and mandible in an absolute position.32 Navigation systems in distraction osteogenesis permit precise localization of the osteotomy sites, positioning of distractor screw holes, and adjustment of the distractor.33 A study on 15 patients was done by Giovanni Badiali et al. to determine the absolute accuracy of maxillary repositioning during orthognathic surgery. They suggested that guided navigation makes post-operative outcomes possible for maxillary repositioning.34 Thus, it is attainable to improvise the precision, well-being, and safety of orthognathic surgery by confirming the surgery planned with navigation.35

Conclusion

Advancements and research in the field of medicine continue in the search for the best technique. Computer-assisted navigation can be now recognized as a minimal invasive procedure and prove to be a boon in surgeries in the oral and maxillofacial regions. Navigation surgery is superior to the conventional methods in terms of accuracy, time taken for the surgery, preservation of adjacent structures, precision, and minimalizing complications. The use of a computer-assisted navigation system is useful in performing osteotomy procedures, foreign object removal, and craniofacial fractures which can be performed safely and precisely. A surgical approach in difficult areas, areas that cannot be assessed or visualized directly can be safely done with careful preservation and anatomical attention with a navigation system.

Source(s) of support

Nil

Conflicting Interest

None

Supporting File
No Pictures
References
  1. Gruss JS, Bubak PJ, Egbert MA. An algorithm to optimize results. Craniofacial fractures. Clin Plast Surg 1992;19: 195-206. 
  2. Manson PN, Hoopes JE, Su CT. Structural pillars of the facial skeleton: an approach to the management of Le Fort fractures. Plast Reconstr Surg 1980; 66: 54-62. 
  3. Nijmeh AD et al. Image-guided navigation in oral and maxillofacial surgery. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2005;43: 294-302. 
  4. Watanabe E et al. Three-dimensional digitizer (Neuronavigator): new equipment for computed tomography-guided stereotaxic surgery. Surg Neurol 1987; 27: 543-547. 
  5. Hannen EJM. Recreating the original contour in tumor deformed mandibles for plate adapting. Int J Oral MaxillofacSurg 2006; 35:183-5. 
  6. Azarmehr I et al. Surgical navi-gation: a systematic review of indications, treatments, andoutcomes in oral and maxillofacial surgery. J Oral MaxillofacSurg 2017; 75:1987-2005.  
  7. Bell RB. Computer planning and intraoperative navigation in cranio-maxillofacial surgery. Oral Maxillofacial Surg Clin N Am 2010; 22: 135-156. 
  8. Li L et al. A novel aug-mented reality navigation system for endoscopic sinus and skullbase surgery: a feasibility study. PLoS One 2016;11(1):e0146996. 
  9. Samarakkody ZM, Abdullah B. The use of image guided navigational tracking systems for endoscopic sinus surgery and skull base surgery: a review. Egypt J Ear Nose Throat AlliedSci 2016; 17:133-7. 
  10. Marmulla R et al. Markerless laser reg-istration in image-guided oral and maxillofacial surgery. J OralMaxillofac Surg 2004; 62:845-51. 
  11. Hoffmann J et al. Validation of 3D-laser surface registration for image-guided cranio-maxillofacial surgery. J Craniomaxillofacial Surg2005; 33:13-8. 
  12. Altobelli DE et al. Computer-assisted threedimensional planning in craniofacial surgery. Plast Reconstr Surg 1993; 92:576-85. 
  13. Howard 3rd MA et al. A noninvasive, reattachable skull fiducial marker system. Technical note. J Neurosurg 1995; 83:372-6. 
  14. Jaesung Hong J et al. Medical navigation system for otologic surgery based on hybrid registration and virtual intraoperative computed tomography. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 2009; 56:426-32. 
  15. Jeon S et al. A hybrid method to improve tar-get registration accuracy in surgical navigation. Minim Invasive Therapy Allied Technol 2015; 24:356-63. 
  16. Marmulla R, Eggers G, Mühling J. Laser surface registration for lateral skull base surgery. Minim Invasive Neurosurg2005; 48:181-5. 
  17. Sinikovi´c B et al. Reconstruction of orbital wall defects with calcium phosphatecement: clinical and histological findings in a sheep model. IntJ Oral Maxillofac Surg 2007; 36:54-61. 
  18. Hardy S et al. A comparison of computer-aided surgery registration methods for endoscopic sinus surgery. Am J Rhinol 2006; 20:48-52. 
  19. Bettschart C et al. Point-to-point registration with mandibulo-maxillary splint in open and closed jaw position. Evaluation of registration accuracy for computer-aided surgery of the mandible. J Craniomaxillofacial Surg 2012; 40:592-8. 
  20. Scolozzi P, Terzic A. Mirroring computational planning, navigation guidance system, and intraoperative mobile C-arm cone-beam computed tomography with flat-panel detector: anew rationale in primary and secondary treatment of midfacial fractures? J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2011; 69:169-707. 
  21. Mustafa SF et al. Customized titanium reconstruction of post-traumatic orbital wall defects: a review of 22 cases. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2011; 40:1357-62. 
  22. Manson PN et al. Subunit principles in midface fractures: the importance of sagittal buttresses, soft-tissue reductions, and sequencing treatment of segmental fractures. Plast ReconstrSurg 1999; 103:1287-306. 
  23. Tarsitano A et al. Orbital reconstruction patient-specific orbital floor reconstruction using a mirroring technique and a customized titanium mesh. J Craniofacial Surg 2016; 27:1822-5. 
  24. Leonard Bergeron et al. Intraoperative surgical navigation reduces the surgical time required to treat acute major facial fractures. Plast Reconstr Surg 2019; 144(4):923-931. 
  25. Sukegawa S et al. Treatment of orbital fractures with orbital-wall defects using anatomically preformed orbital wall reconstruction plate system. J Hard Tissue Biol 2017; 26:231-6. 
  26. Wei R et al. Removal of a foreign body from the skull base using a customized computer-designed guide bar. J Craniomaxillofacial Surg 2010; 38:27- 83. 
  27. Lee TY, Zaid WS. Broken dental needle retrieval using a surgical navigation system: a case report and literature review. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol 2015;119: e55-9. 
  28. Shintaro Sukegawa et al. Optical surgical navigation assisted removal of foreign body using splint to simplify the registration process: a case report. Journal of medical case reports 13, article number:2019;209.
  29. Nezafati S, Shahi S. Removal of broken dental needle using mobile digital C-arm. J Oral Sci 2008; 50:351-3. 
  30. Sukegawa S et al. Use of a piezosurgery techniqueto remove a deeply impacted supernumerary tooth in the anterior maxilla. Case Rep Dent 2015, 
  31. Wang J et al. Navigation-guided extraction of impacted supernumerary teeth: a case report. J OralMaxillofac Surg 2017; 75:1136, e1-1136.e5.  
  32. Zinser MJ et al. Computer-assisted orthognathic surgery: wafer-less maxillary positioning, versatility, and accuracy of an image-guided visualisation display. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2013; 51:827-33. 
  33. Mazzoni S et al. Simulation-guided navigation: a new approach to improve intraoperative threedimensional reproducibility during orthognathic surgery. J Craniofac Surg 2010; 21:1698-705. 
  34. Giovanni Badiali et al. Navigation in orthognathic surgery: 3D accuracy. Facial Plast Surg.2015; 31(5):463-73.
  35. Kang S-H et al. Navigation-assisted intraoral vertical ramus osteotomy. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2011; 69:93-4.
HealthMinds Logo
RGUHS Logo

© 2024 HealthMinds Consulting Pvt. Ltd. This copyright specifically applies to the website design, unless otherwise stated.

We use and utilize cookies and other similar technologies necessary to understand, optimize, and improve visitor's experience in our site. By continuing to use our site you agree to our Cookies, Privacy and Terms of Use Policies.