THE ROLE OF ADVANCED IMAGING AND NAVIGATION IN MODERN FASCIOMAXILLARY SURGERY
Main Article Content
Keywords
Fasciomaxillary Surgery, Advanced Imaging, Surgical Navigation, CBCT (Cone-Beam Computed Tomography), Image-Guided Surgery, Orthognathic Surgery, Maxillofacial Trauma, Surgical Accuracy, 3D Imaging, Intraoperative Technology.
Abstract
BACKGROUND
Fasciomaxillary surgery involves complex procedures requiring high precision due to the dense anatomy and presence of vital structures in the facial region. Traditional methods often relied on 2D imaging and surgeon experience, which limited accuracy and increased the risk of complications. The advent of advanced imaging techniques like CBCT, CT, and MRI has significantly improved preoperative planning by offering detailed 3D visualisation. Additionally, intraoperative navigation systems now provide real-time guidance, enhancing surgical precision and safety. This study investigates the clinical benefits of integrating these technologies into modern fasciomaxillary procedures.
AIM
To assess and illustrate how precise, safe, and successful modern fasciomaxillary surgery is affected by advanced imaging and surgical navigation technologies, with an emphasis on their present uses, advantages, drawbacks, and prospects for clinical practice in the future.
METHODS
Fifty patients undergoing fasciomaxillary surgery at a tertiary care facility participated in a prospective observational study. Patients received treatment for pathological conditions, orthognathic deformities, or trauma. CBCT, CT, or MRI were used for preoperative imaging, depending on the clinical necessity. Sixty percent of cases involved intraoperative navigation. Anatomical accuracy, complication rates, and surgical time were all recorded. Results from standard procedures and navigation-assisted procedures were compared.
RESULT
The sample consisted of 22 female and 28 male patients, with an average age of 41.6 years. Orthognathic correction accounted for 34% of surgical indications, pathology for 26%, and trauma for 40%. At 40%, CBCT was the most widely used imaging modality. In contrast to non-navigation cases, navigation-assisted surgeries (30 patients) had a slightly lower mean surgical time (118 vs. 127 minutes) and a higher mean accuracy rating (4.7 vs. 4.1). Seventy percent of all patients reported no complications following surgery, and the navigation group experienced fewer postoperative complications.
CONCLUSION
In fasciomaxillary surgery, improved surgical precision and fewer complications are achieved through the use of advanced imaging and surgical navigation. Their incorporation into clinical practice supports the trend towards more patient-specific, technology-assisted surgical techniques and improves operative outcomes, particularly in complex procedures.
References
[2] Suojanen J, Lehtonen V, Pyhtinen J, et al. The role of 3D imaging in orthognathic surgery. Oral Maxillofac Surg 2013;17(3):175-81.
[3] Heiland M, Schmelzle R, Hebecker A, et al. Navigation in oral and maxillofacial surgery. Comput Aided Surg 2004;9(5):203-8.
[4] Metzger MC, Hohlweg-Majert B, Schwarz U, et al. Verification of accuracy of computer-assisted surgery in the oral and maxillofacial region using a new phantom model. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2007;36(7):615-21.
[5] Stoor P, Suomalainen A, Mesimäki K, et al. Advanced 3D imaging techniques in Cranio-maxillofacial surgery. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 2014;42(6):e213-9.
[6] Heiland M, Schmelzle R, Hebecker A, et al. Navigation in oral and maxillofacial surgery. Comput Aided Surg 2004;9(5):203-8.
[7] Stoor P, Suomalainen A, Mesimäki K, et al. Advanced 3D imaging techniques in cranio-maxillofacial surgery. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 2014;42(6):e213-9.
[8] Metzger MC, Hohlweg-Majert B, Schwarz U, et al. Verification of accuracy of computer-assisted surgery in the oral and maxillofacial region. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2007;36(7):615-21.
[9] Widmann G, Bale R. Accuracy in computer-aided implant surgery-a review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2006;21(2):305-13.
[10] Suojanen J, Lehtonen V, Pyhtinen J, et al. The role of 3D imaging in orthognathic surgery. Oral Maxillofac Surg 2013;17(3):175-81.
[11] Roser SM, Ramachandra S, Blair H, et al. The accuracy of virtual surgical planning in free fibula mandibular reconstruction: comparison of planned and final results. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2010;68(11):2824-32.
[12] Ciocca L, De Crescenzio F, Fantini M, et al. Direct Metal Laser Sintering (DMLS) for the customization of craniofacial implants. Med Biol Eng Comput 2009;47(12):1347-52.
[13] Goto T, Kanao T, Kobayashi M, et al. Learning curve and clinical outcome of image-guided navigation surgery for craniofacial tumors. J Craniofac Surg 2018;29(4):917-21.
Article Sidebar
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
All articles published in JPTCP are licensed under Copyright Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Dr. Bapugouda Mulimani
Assistant Professor, Department of Dentistry, Raichur Institute of Medical Sciences, Raichur, Karnataka, India.
Dr. Tirumalrao
Associate Professor, Department of Dentistry, Raichur Institute of Medical Sciences, Raichur, Karnataka, India
Dr. Swetha Danaraddi
Senior Resident, Department of Dentistry, Raichur Institute of Medical Sciences, Raichur, Karnataka, India
Dr. Amarvarma L.
Professor, Department of Dentistry, Raichur Institute of Medical Sciences, Raichur, Karnataka, India.
Dr. Jyothi L.
Professor, Department of Dentistry, Navodaya Dental College, Raichur, Karnataka, India.
Dr. Shamana
Senior Resident, Department of Dentistry, Raichur Institute of Medical Sciences, Raichur, Karnataka, India